Court Opinion

ID: 9956056
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-31 07:16:12.289766+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:15:13.925637
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 28, 2024.

                                     In The

                    Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                              NO. 14-23-00548-CR

                      CHRISTOPHER RIOS, Appellant

                                       V.
                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                    On Appeal from the 10th District Court
                          Galveston County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause No. 22-CR-1559

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant appeals his conviction for theft of property with a value of
$150,000 or more but less than $300,000. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(a),
(e)(6)(A). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the
appeal is wholly 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 and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.
See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
      A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than
60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

      We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in
the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief
or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for
review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

      The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                   PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Poissant.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                          2