Court Opinion

ID: 9942483
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-21 09:12:23.635552+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:48:08.803528
License: Public Domain

In the
              Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                   No. 06-23-00132-CR

                RENE SALAS, Appellant

                            V.

           THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

          On Appeal from the 49th District Court
                   Webb County, Texas
           Trial Court No. 2023CRD000242D4

      Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
       Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef
                                      MEMORANDUM OPINION

           Rene Salas entered an open plea of guilty to the first-degree-felony offense of aggravated

assault of a public servant.1 After a punishment trial, a Webb County jury assessed a sentence of

thirty years’ imprisonment. Salas appeals.2

           Salas’s attorney filed a brief stating that he reviewed the record and found no genuinely

arguable issues that could be raised on appeal. The brief sets out the procedural history of the

case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the trial court proceedings. Since counsel

provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable

grounds to be advanced, that evaluation meets the requirements of Anders v. California. Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743–44 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–10 (Tex. Crim. App.

1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel

also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.

           On December 4, 2023, counsel mailed to Salas copies of the brief, the motion to

withdraw, and a motion for pro se access to the appellate record lacking only Salas’s signature.

Counsel informed Salas of his rights to review the record and file a pro se response. By letter

dated December 4, this Court informed Salas that his motion for pro se access to the appellate

record was due on or before December 19 and later granted a motion for extension of time to file

1
    See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a)(2), (b)(2)(B) (Supp.).
2
 Originally appealed to the Fourth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme
Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001 (Supp.). We follow the
precedent of the Fourth Court of Appeals in deciding this case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.
                                                         2
the motion until December 29. On January 9, 2024, this Court further informed Salas that the

case would be set for submission on the briefs on January 30. We received neither a pro se

response from Salas nor a motion requesting an extension of time in which to file such a

response.

         We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous.                         We have independently

reviewed the entire appellate record and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue

supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In

the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial

court’s judgment. Id.

         We affirm the judgment of the trial court.3

                                                        Charles van Cleef
                                                        Justice

Date Submitted:             January 30, 2024
Date Decided:               February 16, 2024

Do Not Publish

3
 Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel’s
request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute
counsel will be appointed. Should appellant desire to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals, she must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition
for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from either the
date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court, see TEX.
R. APP. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3,
and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see TEX. R.
APP. P. 68.4.
                                                            3