Court Opinion

ID: 3114109
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 07:20:55.118815+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:45:02.308439
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-10-00036-CR
 
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
 
FOR THE
SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
AT
AMARILLO
 
PANEL A
 

SEPTEMBER
7, 2010
 

 
THOMAS OCHOA, APPELLANT
 
v.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

 
 FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK
COUNTY;
 
NO. 2008-420,143; HONORABLE CECIL G. PURYEAR, JUDGE

 

 
Before CAMPBELL
and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.
 
 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
 
Appellant, Thomas Ochoa, appeals from
a conviction for two counts of indecency with a child[1]
and, sentence of confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice for 18 years on each conviction, all confinement
to run concurrently.  We affirm.
Appellant=s attorney has
filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw.  Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87
S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.
2d 498 (1967). 
In support of his motion to withdraw, counsel certifies that he has
diligently reviewed the record, and in his opinion, the record reflects no
reversible error upon which an appeal can be predicated.  Id. at 744-45.  In compliance with High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), counsel has
candidly discussed why, under the controlling authorities, there is no error in
the trial court=s judgment.  Additionally, counsel has certified that he
has provided appellant a copy of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw
and appropriately advised appellant of his right to file a pro se
response in this matter.  Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App.
1991).  The court has also advised
appellant of his right to file a pro se response.  Appellant has not filed a response.
By his Anders brief, counsel raised a ground that
could possibly support an appeal, but concludes the appeal is frivolous.  We have reviewed this ground and made an
independent review of the entire record to determine whether there are any
arguable grounds which might support an appeal. 
See Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988); Bledsoe
v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex.Crim.App.
2005).  We have found no such arguable
grounds and agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous.
Accordingly, counsel=s motion to
withdraw is hereby granted and the trial court=s judgment is
affirmed.[2]
                                                                                                Mackey
K. Hancock
Justice
Do not publish.

[1] See Tex.
Penal Code Ann. § 21.11(a)(1) (Vernon 2009).

[2] Counsel shall, within five days
after this opinion is handed down, send his client a copy of the opinion and
judgment, along with notification of appellant=s right to file a pro se petition for discretionary
review.  See Tex. R. App. P. 48.4.