Court Opinion

ID: 4461367
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-12-04 23:12:40.739116+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:04:12.730219
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-19-00015-CR
                               __________________

                        PEDRO GARCIA III, Appellant

                                         V.

                  THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 221st District Court
                     Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 18-04-05512-CR
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      On July 17, 2018, a Montgomery County Grand Jury indicted Pedro Garcia,

III for theft of property in an amount less than $2,500, a class A misdemeanor

enhanced to a state jail felony based on multiple prior theft convictions. See Tex.

Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(e)(4)(D). The State further alleged two enhancements for

prior felony convictions of unlawful possession of a firearm and burglary of a

habitation, elevating the offense to a second-degree felony. See id. § 12.425(b). The

                                         1
jury found Garcia guilty of the state jail felony offense of theft of property. During

the punishment hearing, Garcia pled “true” to the additional enhancement

paragraphs for prior convictions of unlawful possession of a firearm and burglary of

a habitation. The jury found the enhancement paragraphs to be “true” and sentenced

Garcia to ten years of confinement.

      Garcia’s appellate counsel filed a brief presenting counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.

[Panel Op.] 1978). We notified Garcia of his right to file a pro se brief, but we

received no response.

      We have independently examined the entire appellate record in this matter,

and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. We have determined that

this appeal is wholly frivolous. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d
503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

      AFFIRMED.

                                                    _________________________
                                                         CHARLES KREGER
                                                              Justice

                                          2
Submitted on November 8, 2019
Opinion Delivered December 4, 2019
Do Not Publish

Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

                                         3