Court Opinion

ID: 2864950
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 00:48:10.427486+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:35:13.814306
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-02-00235-CR

Mark Lagrada Canete, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. A-99-0652-S, HONORABLE CURT F. STEIB, JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellant Mark Lagrada Canete was placed on community supervision after being
convicted of burglary of a habitation on a plea of guilty.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02 (West
Supp. 2002).  His supervision was revoked after he admitted several of the violations alleged in the
motion to revoke. 

Appellant'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 appellant, and appellant 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.  Counsel's
motion to withdraw is granted.
The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

  
				Mack Kidd, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Patterson and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed:   August 30, 2002
Do Not Publish