Jesus Morales Jr. v. State ( 2008 )


Menu:
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-08-00112-CR
    Jesus Morales Jr., Appellant
    v.
    The State of Texas, Appellee
    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    NO. B-07-0694-S, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    A jury found appellant Jesus Morales, Jr., guilty of the unlawful possession of a
    firearm by a felon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 46.04 (West Supp. 2008). The jury assessed his
    punishment, enhanced by two previous felony conviction, at imprisonment for twenty-five years.
    A pickup truck being driven by appellant’s brother was stopped for speeding by
    Trooper Carlos Diaz. Diaz subsequently arrested appellant’s brother on an outstanding warrant and
    for driving while his license was suspended. Diaz arrested appellant, who was also in the truck,
    for public intoxication. Diaz found a shotgun and a .22 rifle in the truck. The vehicle and both
    firearms belonged to the brothers’ employer, Leland Key. Key testified that he had given appellant’s
    brother possession of the truck and the shotgun for employment-related use. Key did not know how
    the .22 rifle came to be in the truck. The rifle had been taken without his knowledge from a trailer
    house on his property.
    Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by 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). After receiving a copy of counsel’s brief and
    examining the appellate record, appellant filed a pro se brief.
    We have reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the pro se brief. We agree that
    the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support
    the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s
    motion to withdraw is granted.
    The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
    __________________________________________
    Jan P. Patterson, Justice
    Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson
    Affirmed
    Filed: December 19, 2008
    Do Not Publish
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-08-00112-CR

Filed Date: 12/19/2008

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/6/2015