eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2001-10

Manuel Antonio Rios v. State ( 2001 )


Menu:
 
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-01-00218-CR
Manuel Antonio Rios, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 49,132, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING
In July 1999, appellant Manuel Antonio Rios was placed on deferred adjudication
community supervision after he pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann.
§ 22.021 (West Supp. 2001). In March 2001, the court revoked supervision, adjudicated Rios guilty,
and sentenced him to imprisonment for thirteen years.
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 presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable
grounds to be advanced. 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. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Bea Ann Smith, Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed: October 11, 2001
Do Not Publish
2