Opinion issued August 1, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-22-00818-CR

———————————

ERIC GUADALUPE BALDERAS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 506th District Court

Waller County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 20-06-17328 (Counts I, II, and III)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After appellant, Eric Guadalupe Balderas, without an agreed punishment 

recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to three “counts” of the felony 
2

offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child,

1

the jury found appellant guilty of 

each “count” and assessed his punishment at confinement for thirty-five years for 

the first and second “counts” and at confinement for thirty-seven years and six 

months for the third “count,” with his sentences to run concurrently.

2

 Appellant 

timely filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along 

with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is

without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record and supplying the Court with references to the record and 

legal authority. See id. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and 

is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 

U.S. at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

2006, no pet.).

Counsel has informed the Court that he provided appellant with a copy of the 

brief and the motion to withdraw. Counsel has also informed appellant of his right 

to examine the appellate record and file a response to counsel’s Anders brief, and he

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021(a), (e).

2 The jury also assessed a fine of $10,000 for each “count.”
3

provided him with a form motion to access the appellate record.

3 See Kelly v. State, 

436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 

408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellant has not filed a response to his counsel’s 

Anders brief.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in the appeal, and we 

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds 

for review, and the appeals are frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing 

reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of 

proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 

767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable 

grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines 

whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that appellant 

may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for an appeal by filing a 

petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See 

Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

3 This Court also notified appellant that counsel had filed an Anders brief and a

motion to withdraw and informed appellant that he had a right to examine the 

appellate record and file a response to his counsel’s Anders brief. And this Court 

provided appellant with a form motion to access the appellate record. See Kelly v. 

State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–22 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 

S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
4

Conclusion

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant appellant’s appointed 

counsel’s motion to withdraw.4 Attorney Travis Fleetwod must immediately send 

appellant the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

Julie Countiss

Justice

Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Countiss.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

4 Appellant’s appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of 

this appeal and that appellant may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the 

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 1997).