Court Opinion

ID: 9399466
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-04 07:11:34.043866+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:09.762600
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 1, 2023.

                                     In The

                     Fourteenth Court of Appeals
                                   ____________

                              NO. 14-22-00344-CR
                                   ____________

                 MARIO ALVERTO NAVARRO, Appellant
                                       V.

                       THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                     On Appeal from the 482nd District Court
                             Harris County, Texas
                         Trial Court Cause No. 1666302

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Mario Alverto Navarro appeals his conviction for aggravated
sexual assault of a child less than 14 years old.    See Tex. Pen. Code Ann.
§ 22.021(a)(2)(B).    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). At appellant’s request, the
record was provided to him. However, as of this date, appellant has not filed a pro
se response addressing the contentions in counsel’s brief.

      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, Hassan, and Wilson.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                         2