Court Opinion

ID: 2879918
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 05:35:45.736098+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:46:07.395831
License: Public Domain

i          i       i                                                               i    i     i

                                MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                        No. 04-09-00051-CR

                                          Andrew REYES,
                                             Appellant

                                                 v.

                                       The STATE of Texas,
                                             Appellee

                     From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
                                  Trial Court No. 2007-CR-5055B
                              Honorable Mary Roman, Judge Presiding

Opinion by:       Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Sitting:          Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
                  Rebecca Simmons, Justice
                  Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 9, 2009

AFFIRMED

           Defendant, Andrew Reyes, pled no contest to first-degree burglary, pursuant to a plea

bargain. The trial court assessed punishment at ten years’ confinement, and granted defendant

permission to appeal.

           Defendant’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief containing a professional

evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.
                                                                                                           04-09-00051-CR

Counsel concludes that the appeal is without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Defendant was informed of his right to review the record. Counsel

provided defendant with a copy of the brief and advised him of his right to file a pro se brief.

Defendant did not file a pro se brief.

         After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without

merit. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment, and we GRANT appellate counsel’s

motion to withdraw.1 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.).

                                                                   Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH

         1
           … No substitute counsel will be appointed. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W .3d 403, 408 n.22 (Tex. Crim. App.
2008). Should defendant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, defendant
must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review.
Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely
motion for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must
be filed with this court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals along with the rest of
the filings in this case. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the
requirements of Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 68.4.

                                                             -2-