Court Opinion

ID: 2862217
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 22:19:56.07337+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:34:41.381795
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-98-00037-CR

Jorge Arredondo, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 47,981, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

Appellant Jorge Arredondo pleaded guilty to intoxication assault.  See Tex. Penal
Code Ann. § 49.07 (West 1994).  After accepting the plea and appellant's judicial confession, the
district court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment at imprisonment for eight years and
a $500 fine.

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
was 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.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Justices Jones, B. A. Smith and Yeakel

Affirmed

Filed:   May 13, 1999

Do Not Publish