Sanchez
v.
State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Twelfth District, TylerApr 20, 2011
No. 12-10-00003-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 20, 2011)

No. 12-10-00003-CR

Opinion delivered April 20, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appealed from the Third Judicial District Court Anderson County, Texas.

Panel consisted of WORTHEN, C.J., GRIFFITH, J., and HOYLE, J.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Gerardo Sanchez appeals his conviction for two counts of driving while intoxicated with a child passenger. Appellant pleaded guilty and the trial court assessed his sentence at two years of confinement in a state jail facility and a fine of $2,500.00. The court suspended the sentence and placed Appellant on community supervision for five years. Subsequently, the State moved to revoke community supervision. Appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the motion. The trial court revoked Appellant's community supervision and sentenced him to two years of confinement in a state jail facility. Appellant's counsel filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in support of that motion in compliance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967) and Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). We dismiss Appellant's appeal.

ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO ANDERS V. CALIFORNIA

Appellant's counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders and Gainous , stating that he is well acquainted with the facts in this case and has diligently reviewed the appellate record. In compliance with Anders , Gainous , and High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), Appellant's brief presents a chronological summation of the procedural history of the case, and further states that Appellant's counsel is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible error and counsel is unable to raise any arguable issues for appeal. We have considered counsel's brief and conducted our own independent review of the record. We have found no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

CONCLUSION

As required, Appellant's counsel has moved for leave to withdraw. See In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We are in agreement with Appellant's counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Accordingly, his motion to withdraw is hereby granted , and we dismiss this appeal. See In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d at 408-09. Counsel has a duty to, within five days of the date of this opinion, send a copy of the opinion and judgment to Appellant and advise him of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4; In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d at 411 n. 35. Should Appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or he must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of this opinion or the date the last timely filed motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with this court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals along with the rest of the filings in the case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4; In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d at 408 n. 22.