Jose Ruiz v. State ( 1999 )


Menu:
  • 
    
    
    
    
    
    

    TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN






    NO. 03-99-00192-CR


    Jose Ruiz, Appellant


    v.



    The State of Texas, Appellee








    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

    NO. 0982517, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING


    Appellant Jose Ruiz pleaded guilty before a jury to intoxication manslaughter and failing to stop and render aid. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.08 (West 1994); Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 550.023 (West 1999). After hearing evidence, the jury assessed punishment for the former offense at imprisonment for twelve years, and at imprisonment for five years for the latter. The district court rendered a separate judgment of conviction for each offense.

    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 advancing a contention counsel says might arguably support the appeal.  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 has been filed.

    We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. A discussion of the contention advanced in counsel's brief would serve no beneficial purpose.

    The judgments of conviction are affirmed.





    Jan P. Patterson, Justice

    Before Justices Jones, Kidd and Patterson

    Affirmed

    Filed: November 4, 1999

    Do Not Publish