Court Opinion

ID: 2988083
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-23 02:22:09.486867+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:32:24.590244
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 28, 2012.

                                       In The

                     Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                               NO. 14-12-00624-CR

                 ROBERTO CANALES MANCIAS, Appellant
                                         V.

                       THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                    On Appeal from the 337th District Court
                            Harris County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. 1323660

                 MEMORANDUM                       OPINION

      Appellant entered a plea of guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly
weapon. On June 27, 2012, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for
fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

      Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal
is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to
be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

      A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, no pro se
response has been filed.

      We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error
in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders
brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds
for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

      Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                       PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Brown and Busby.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                         2