Richard Sanchez v. State ( 2009 )


Menu:
  • i          i     i                                                                 i      i      i
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    No. 04-08-00937-CR
    Richard SANCHEZ,
    Appellant
    v.
    The STATE of Texas,
    Appellee
    From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 2002-CR-4239
    Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl Judge Presiding
    Opinion by:      Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Sitting:         Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
    Rebecca Simmons, Justice
    Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Delivered and Filed: November 25, 2009
    MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
    Richard Sanchez pled no contest to a charge of indecency with a child by exposure in
    exchange for the State’s recommendation that adjudication be deferred. Pursuant to the plea
    agreement, the trial court deferred adjudication and placed Sanchez on community supervision for
    a period of six years. The State later filed a motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging Sanchez violated
    04-08-00937-CR
    various conditions of his community supervision. Sanchez pled not true to the allegations. After
    a hearing, the trial court adjudicated Sanchez guilty and sentenced him to six years in prison.
    Sanchez’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which
    she concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders
    v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and
    Gainous v. State, 
    436 S.W.2d 137
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Sanchez was provided a copy of the
    brief and motion to withdraw and was further informed of his right to review the record and file his
    own brief. Sanchez has not done so.
    After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with
    counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-27 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Sanchez’s counsel and affirm the
    trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 
    954 S.W.2d 83
    , 86 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1997,
    no pet.); Bruns v. State, 
    924 S.W.2d 176
    , 177 n.1 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1996, no pet.).
    No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Sanchez 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 file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary
    review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion
    for rehearing that 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 this case. See 
    id. R. 68.3.
    Any petition for discretionary
    -2-
    04-08-00937-CR
    review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
    See 
    id. R. 68.4.
    Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Do not publish
    -3-