Court Opinion

ID: 3098518
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 04:52:19.258009+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:43.939962
License: Public Domain

Opinion filed March 5,
2010
 
                                                                       In The
                                                                              
  Eleventh
Court of Appeals
                                                                   __________
 
                                                         No. 11-10-00014-CR
                                                    __________
 
                          TRACY
CASTENEDA AVILES, Appellant
 
                                                             V.
 
                                      STATE
OF TEXAS, Appellee

 
                                   On
Appeal from the 27th District Court
 
                                                               Bell
County, Texas 
 
                                                      Trial
Court Cause No. 64344
 

 
                                            M E M O R A N
D U M   O P I N I O N
 
             The
trial court convicted Tracy Casteneda Aviles, upon his plea of guilty, of evading
arrest with a motor vehicle.  A plea bargain agreement was not reached.  The
trial court assessed punishment at confinement in a state jail facility for
twenty-one months.  We dismiss.
Appellant’s
court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw.  The motion is
supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously
examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that
the appeal is frivolous.  Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the
brief and advised appellant of his right to review the record and file a response
to counsel’s brief.  A response has not been filed.  Court-appointed counsel
has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App.
1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.CEastland 2005, no pet.).
Following
the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the
record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit.  We note that counsel
has the responsibility to advise appellant that he may file a petition for
discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.  Ex parte Owens,
206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  Likewise, this court advises appellant
that he may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 66.  Black v. State,
217 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.CEastland
2007, no pet.). 
The
motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.
 
PER CURIAM
 
March 5, 2010
Do not publish. 
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.