Court Opinion

ID: 3007679
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-07 13:14:41.643462+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:50.866366
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                      NO. 03-15-00227-CR

                                  Pedro P. Morales, Appellant

                                                 v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee

  FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 340TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
       NO. C-14-1091-SA, HONORABLE BEN WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant Pedro Perez Morales was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm

by a felon, a third degree felony. Tex. Penal Code § 46.04(a). A jury found Morales guilty and

assessed his punishment at five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of

Criminal Justice and a $2,000 fine.

               Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a

brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of

Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there

are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);

Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 86–87 (1988).
               Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine

the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at

766. We have not received a pro se brief from the appellant.

               We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate

counsel’s brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d

at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel

that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous.

               Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

                                             __________________________________________

                                             Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field

Affirmed

Filed: October 7, 2015

Do Not Publish

                                                2