/02t-(5 / 035-/5

ORIGINAL 03-14-00494-CR &03-14-00495-CR

QWuo^ ^t oV^e-no*^ afr)\£^

/ RECEIVED\

OCT 1 6 2015

kTHlRDCOURJOfAPPEAtS,

\ .BTHEYP.KYIE /

»ro owa rfvt wovi *w ^ ^« LD^cr nD^ao^. tosew

toNvotz- UA<> U -rvWt tAOcioA 6fw* wetf^ mftoe-

'1/)/^ |^L/t

RECEIVED IN

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OCT 19 2015

Abe! Acosta, Clerk
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-14-00494-CR

NO. 03-14-00495-CR

Isaac Benavidez, Appellant

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NOS. 15,265 & 15,266

HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER DARROW DUGGAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In January 2014, appellant Isaac Benavidezpled guilty to four counts of intentional

serious bodilyinjury to a childandreceived tenyears'deferred adjudication probation. SeeTex.Penal

Code § 22.04; Tex. Code Crim Proc. art. 42.12, § 3g. In May 2014, upon finding that appellant

had violatedcertaintermsof his probation, the trialcourtrevokedappellant's deferredadjudication

and sentenced him to sixty years' imprisonment on the first count and ten years' imprisonment on

each of the remaining three counts, to run concurrently. SeeTex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.12, §23.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal

is frivolous and without merit. Counsel's briefmeets the requirements of Anders v. California by

presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable

grounds to be advanced. See 386U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967); Garner v. State, 300S.W.3d 763, 766
(Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-82 (1988). Appellant's counsel

hasrepresented to the Court that he providedappellant with copies of the brief and accompanying

motions to withdraw; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se

brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and

provided appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the

mailing address of thisCourt. SeeKelly v. State, 436S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014);

see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. Although appellant requested and

received the appellate record and additional time to file a pro se brief, that time has run and no

pro se brief has been filed.

We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might

arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe

v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal

is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment

of conviction.1

1 No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wishto seekfurther review of

his case by the Texas Court ofCriminal Appeals, hemust either retain anattorney to file a petition

fordiscretionary review orfile aprosepetition for discretionary review. Seegenerally Tex. R.App.

P. 68-79 (governing proceedings in Court of Criminal Appeals). Any petition for discretionary

reviewmustbe filedwithinthirtydaysfromthe dateof eitherthis opinionor the datethat this Court

overrules thelasttimely motion for rehearing filed. Seeid. R. 68.2. Thepetition must be filed with

the clerk of theCourt ofCriminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(a). If thepetition is mistakenly filed with

thisCourt, it will be forwarded to the CourtofCriminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(b). Anypetitionfor

discretionary review should complywith the rules ofappellate procedure. See id. R. 68.4. Once this

Court receives notice that a petition has been filed, the filings in this case cause will be forwarded

to the Court ofCriminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.7.
David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Bourland

Affirmed

Filed: July 14, 2015

Do Not Publish