# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 13

- 00340

- CV IN THE MATTER OF K.F. , a Juvenile From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012

- JUV

- 01564 Honorable Carmen Kelsey, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Rebeca C. Mart inez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 18 , 2014
AFFIRMED Appellant K.F. was charged with delinquent conduct for committing aggravated sexual assault of a child on or about January 3, 2012. K.F. entered a plea of true to the allegation pursuant to a plea agreement with the State. Under such agreement, (1) K.F. entered a plea of true to count I of the State’s First Amended Petition Alleging Delinquent Conduct, (2) the State abandoned the remaining counts in the petition a nd recommended probation, and (3) K.F. waived appeal. On May 20, 2013, the trial court found the allegations true and further found there was a need for disposition. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the trial court placed K.F. on probation and ordered
him in the care, custody, and control of the Chief Juvenile Probation Officer of Bexar County, Texas until September 29, 2016, K.F.’s eighteenth birthday. The trial court signed the orders of adjudication and disposition on June 11, 2013. This appeal ensued

.04

- 13

- 00340

- CV

K.F.’s court

- appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 44.2. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967 ), High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); see In re D.A.S ., 973 S.W.2d 296, 297 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding) ( Anders procedures apply to appeals from juvenile delinquency adjudications); In re A.L.H ., 974 S.W.2d 359, 360 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1998, no pet.) (same). Counsel provided the juvenile and his mother copies of the brief and motion to withdraw; they we re infor med of the juvenile’s right to file his own brief. See In re
A.L.H ., 974 S.W.2d at 360

– 61. No pro se brief has been filed. After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivo lous. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We, therefore, grant the motion to withdraw filed by K.F.’s counsel and affirm the trial court’s orders. See id .; Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State , 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1996, no pet.). 1

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

1 No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should K.F. wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Supreme Court, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for review or file a pro se petition for review. Any petition for review must be filed within forty

- five days after either this opinion is rendered or the last timely motion for rehearing or motion for en banc reconsideration is overruled by this court. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 53.7(a). Any petition for review must comply with the requirements of rule 53.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 53.2.

- 2

-