### NUM BER 13-08- 0030 1-CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I - E DI NBURG

FR A NC ISCO N A

VA , JR ., A pp ellan t,

v . TH E ST A

TE OF T EXA S, A pp ellee.

On ap pe al f rom th e 1 05t h Dist rict C ou rt o f N ue ces Co un ty , T exas .



## ME MOR A N D U M OP I N I ON B ef o re C h ie f Ju st ic e Va ld ez a n d J u st ic es G ar za a n d V el a

M em o ra n d u m Op in io n b y J u st ic e Ga rza Appel lan t, Fr anci sc o N av a, J r. , w as ind ic ted o n Apr il 11, 2003, on one count of

re ck les sl y

ca usi ng bodi ly

i nju ry to a c hil d, a s tate jai l felony

. See T EX

. P EN AL C OD E A NN

. § 22. 04( a) (3 ), ( f) ( Ver non Su pp. 2 008)

. Nav a w a s re -in d ic ted o n M ay 29, 2003 for

the off ense of r eck les sl y caus ing se ri ous bodi ly i nju ry to a c hil d, a sec ond- deg re e felony

. See id. § 22.04( a) (1 ), (e) (Ver non Supp. 2008)

. The Stat e r e- ind ic ted N av a a s econd ti me on June 5, 2003, char g ing him w it h intent ion all y or k now ing ly

ca usi ng se ri ous bodi ly i nju ry to

a c hil d, a firs t- deg re e felony

. See i d. Pur suant to the ter ms of a pl ea bar g ain ag re ement, Nav a pl eaded g uil ty

to the fir st- deg re e f e lo n y and w as pla ced on defer re d adj udi cat ion

com mu nity supe rv ision f or a period of ten years.2

On J uly 22, 2004, the Stat e filed a mot ion to re v oke Nav a’s co mmunity su per v is ion

. Nav a ple aded “t ru e” to the all eg ati ons cont ain ed i n the moti on and w as sent enced to thi rt y day s i n j ail

. The Stat e fil ed a sec ond motion to r ev oke Nav a’s co mmunity su per v is ion on Nov ember

1, 2005. N av a agai n pleaded “t ru e” to the a ll eg ati ons cont ain ed i n the moti on and w as ord er ed to attend an alc ohol co unsel ing pr og ra m. A thi rd moti on to r ev oke w as f iled by the Stat e on August 21 , 200 6; Nava plea ded “true” to the th ose a llegations as well, and w as or der ed to under g o a s ubst ance abuse ev alu ati on. On M arch 24, 200 8, the Sta te filed its f ourth and f inal mo tion to rev oke N ava’s communi ty

su per v is ion

. Nav a onc e ag ain ple aded “t ru e” to t he al leg ati ons cont ain ed i n the

m o t io n

. T h is t im e , t h e t ri a l co u rt gr a n t e d t h e S t a t e ’s m o t io n a n d s e n t e n c e d Na va t o t we lve y ear s’ co nfinement in the I nst it uti onal D iv is ion of the Tex as Dep artment of Cr imi nal Ju sti ce. N av a no w

a pp ea l s , an d w e affi r m. I. A N D ERS B R I EF Nav a’s co urt- appoi nted appel lat e c ounse l has filed a mot ion to w it hdr aw and a br ief in suppo rt ther eof in w hic h s he s tates that she has dili g entl y r ev iew ed th e ent ir e r ecor d and that “h er re v iew and inv est ig ati on hav e re v eal ed no er ro r to br ing to thi s [C ]our t’ s a ttent ion .” See Ande rs v. C alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967 ). C oun sel not es three issues tha t could “p otent i a l l y ” b e r a i s e d o n a p p e a l : ( 1 ) t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t l a c k e d j u r i s d i c t i o n ; ( 2 ) t h at t he evidence w as insuf

f icent to supp ort Nava’s conviction; an d (3) that th e imp osed sente nce
w as ou tside th e stat uto ry ran ge. Coun sel conclu des, h owev er, tha t the se issues lack m erit and t hat a ny

appeal i n thi s c ase w oul d be friv olo us. See i d. C ounse l’ s b ri ef meets t he

r e q u i r e me n t s o f And ers as it prese nts a pr ofessi onal ev alu ati on s how ing w hy ther e ar e no
ar g uabl e g ro unds for adv anci ng an appeal

. See I n r e Sc hul m an , 252 S.W .3d 4 03, 4 07 n. 9 (Tex . Cr im. App. 2008) (or ig . pr oceed ing ); Staf for d v . St ate , 8 1 3 S

. W

. 2 d 5 0 3 , 5 1 0 n

. 3 (T e x. Crim. App . 199 1) (en ban c). In c ompli ance w it h Hi

gh v . St ate , 573 S.W .2d 8 07, 8 13 (Tex . Cr im. App. [Panel Op. ] 197 8), coun sel has care f ully discussed w hy, und er cont rolling aut hority, there are no errorsT he T exas C our t of C r i m i nal Appeal s has hel d t hat “ t he pr o se r esponse need not com pl y wi t h t he 1 rul es of ap pe l l ate pro c ed ure i n o rde r t o b e c on s i de red

. R athe r, t he r e s po ns e s ho ul d i de nti fy for t he co urt t hose i ssues whi ch t he i ndi gent app el l ant bel i ev es t he co urt shou l d con si der i n de ci di ng whet her t he ca se pre s en t s an y m eri t ori ou s i s s ue s

. ” I n r e Schul m an , 252 S. W

. 3d 403, 409 n. 23 ( T ex. C r i m

. App. 200 8) ( quot i ng W i l s o n v . S ta te , 95 5 S

. W

. 2d 69 3, 69 6-9 7 (T ex

. A pp

. –W ac o 1 99 7, no pe t

. ))

. 3 in the tr ial cour

t’ s jud g ment. Cou nsel has infor med thi s C our t t hat s he has ( 1) ex amined the r ecor d and has found no ar g uabl e g ro unds to ad v ance on appe al, ( 2) se rv ed a copy of t he br ief and moti on to w it hdr aw on appel lan t, and (3 ) infor med appel lan t of his r ig ht t o
rev iew the reco rd and to f ile a pro se respo nse wi thin th irty days. See Ande rs , 386 U .S.

1 at 74 4; Sta fford , 813 S.W .2d a t 510 n.3. Mo re than an adeq uate ti me has pas sed, and no pr o s e r espon se has been fil ed. II. I NDEPE NDENT R EVI EW Upo n r ecei v ing an And ers br ief, w e must co nduct a full ex aminat ion of all the pr oceed ing s to deter mine w hether the cas e is w hol ly fri v olo us. Pen son v. Oh io , 488 U .S. 75, 8 0 ( 1 9 8 8 ). W e hav e r ev iew ed th e r ecor d and find th at t he appe al is w hol ly fri v olo us and w it hout meri t. See Bleds oe v . St ate , 178 S.W .3d 824, 827- 28 ( Tex . C ri m. App. 2005) ( “ D u e t o t h e n a t u r e o f And ers br iefs, by ind ic ati ng in the o pin ion i t c onsi der ed th e i ss ues
ra is ed in the b ri ef and r ev iew ed th e r ecor d for re v er si ble er ro r but found n one, the c our t of appeal s met the r eq uir ements of T ex as Rul e of

Appell ate P ro cedur e 47. 1.” ); Sta fford , 813 S.W .2d a t 509

. Acc or din g ly , w e aff ir m the jud g ment of the tr ial co urt. III

. M OT I ON TO W IT H D R AW In ac cor dance w it h And ers , c ounse l has filed a mot ion to wi thdr aw

. See Ande rs , 386 U .S. at 74 4; see als o In re Sc hul m an , 252 S.W .3d at 40 8 n.1 7 ( ci ti ng Je ffer y v . St ate , 903 S. W .2d 7 76, 7 79- 80 ( Tex . Ap p.–D all as 1 9 9 5 , n o pet. ) (“ If an att or ney bel iev es the appeal i s fr iv olo us, he mus t w it hdr aw f ro m re pr esent ing the appel lan t. To w it hdr aw from

re p re s e n t a t io n , t h e a p p o in t e d a t t o rn e y m u s t f il e a m o t io n t o wit h d ra w a c c o m p a n ie d b y a b r i e f s h o w i n g t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t t h a t t h e a p p e a l i s f r i v o l o u s

. ” ) ( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) )

. W e gr a n t t h e m o t io n t o wit h d ra w.N o subst i t ut e counsel w i l l be appoi nt ed. Shoul d ap pel l ant wi sh t o see k f ur t her r ev i ew of t hi s case 2 by t he T ex as C ou rt of C ri m i na l A pp ea l s , he m us t ei t he r ret ai n an att orn ey t o f i l e a pe t i ti o n fo r d i s c ret i on ary r e v ie w o r f ile a p r o s e p e tit io n f o r d is c r e tio n a r y r e v ie w . A n y p e tit io n f o r d is c r e tio n a r y r e v ie w m u s t b e f ile d w ith in th ir ty d a ys f r o m th e d a te o f e ith e r th is o p in io n o r th e la s t t im e ly m o tio n f o r r e h e a r in g th a t w a s o v e r r u le d b y th is C o u rt. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68. 2. Any pet i t i on f or di scr et i onar y re v i ew m ust be f i l ed wi t h t hi s C our t , af t er whi ch i t w i l l b e fo rw a rd e d to th e T e x a s C o u rt o f C rim i n a l A p p e a l s

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68. 3, 68. 7. Any pet i t i on f or d i s c re t i on ary revi ew m us t co m pl y w i t h t he requ i rem en t s of R ul e 6 8.4 of t he T ex as R ul es of A pp el l a te P ro c e d u re

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68. 4. 4 W e further or der that couns el must, w it hin fiv e day s of the dat e of thi s o pin ion , s end

a c opy of the opi nio n and jud g ment to Nav a and adv is e him of his ri g ht t o fil e a p eti ti on for d is c re t io n a ry r e vie w. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 48.4; see als o In re Sc hul m an , 252 S.W .3d a t 2 412 n. 35; Ex par

te O wens , 206 S.W .3d 670 , 673 (Tex. Cr im. Ap p. 20 06).

DO RI C ON TRER AS G AR ZA, J u s t i c e Do not p ubl is h. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47 .2(b). Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv er ed and filed thi s t he 19t h day

of Ma rc h, 20 09.