Court Opinion

ID: 2864704
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 00:44:08.318812+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:36:14.314206
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-02-00457-CR

Juan Cuadrado, Jr., Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 50,419, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellant Juan Cuadrado, Jr., was placed on deferred adjudication community
supervision after he pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery.  The district court later revoked
supervision and adjudicated him guilty after he admitted most of the violations alleged in the State's
motion to adjudicate.  The court sentenced Cuadrado to seven years' imprisonment.

Cuadrado's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to Cuadrado, and he was advised of his
right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

  
				Bea Ann Smith, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Yeakel
Affirmed
Filed:   October 24, 2002
Do Not Publish