Victor Campos v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                             NUMBER 13-14-00271-CR
    COURT OF APPEALS
    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
    VICTOR CAMPOS,                                                              Appellant,
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                          Appellee.
    On appeal from the 148th District Court
    of Nueces County, Texas.
    ORDER ABATING APPEAL
    Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria
    Order Per Curiam
    Pursuant to Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 744 (1967), appellant’s counsel
    has filed a brief and a motion to withdraw with this Court, stating that his review of the
    record in trial court cause number 13-CR-2591-E yielded no grounds of error upon which
    an appeal can be predicated.1 Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of
    Anders v. California, by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating
    why counsel concluded there are no arguable grounds for relief. See 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967).
    Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all the
    proceedings to determine whether the case is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 80 (1988). In this evaluation, we consider the record and the arguments raised in
    the Anders brief. See United States v. Wagner, 
    158 F.3d 901
    , 902 (5th Cir.1998); In re
    Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d 403
    , 409 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding). A court of
    appeals has two options when an Anders brief is filed. After reviewing the entire record,
    it may: (1) determine that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining
    that it finds no reversible error; or (2) determine that there are arguable grounds for appeal
    and remand the case to the trial court for appointment of new appellate counsel. Bledsoe
    v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). If the court finds arguable
    grounds for appeal, it may not review those grounds until after new counsel has briefed
    those issues on appeal. 
    Id. 1 Upon
    open pleas of guilty, the trial court found appellant Victor Campos guilty of burglary of a
    habitation with the intent to commit a felony (robbery) in trial court cause number 13-CR-2691-E and three
    counts of possession of a controlled substance in cause numbers 13-CR-2692-E (felony cocaine), and 13-
    CR-2693-E (state-jail cocaine), 13-CR-3446-E (state-jail marijuana), the offenses ranging from state-jail to
    first-degree felonies. On appeal, appellant’s counsel filed an Anders brief as to all convictions. On July 16,
    2015, we affirmed the controlled-substance convictions. See Campos v. State, No. 13-14-00269-CR, 2015
    WL ____, at __ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi July 16, 2015, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for
    publication); Campos v. State, No. 13-14-00270-CR, 2015 WL ____, at __ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi July
    16, 2015, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Campos v. State, No. 13-14-00272-CR, 2015
    WL ____, at __ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi July 16, 2015, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for
    publication). This abatement order only addresses the appeal from Campos’s conviction for burglary of a
    habitation with the intent to commit a felony.
    2
    After our independent review, we conclude that there are “arguable” appellate
    issues in this case. See 
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 744
    ; 
    Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826
    –27.
    For instance, counsel has briefed an issue pertaining to the use of a firearm. We stress
    that we have not determined that this argument has merit or that it is the only issue that could be
    raised on appeal.
    We conclude that appellate counsel has met his professional obligations under
    Anders and GRANT his motion to withdraw in this appeal that this Court carried with the
    case on February 3, 2015. We ABATE the appeal and REMAND the case to the trial court
    for appointment of a new appellate attorney. See 
    Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409
    .
    The trial court shall make the appointment and ensure that a supplemental record
    of the proceedings is filed in this Court no later than twenty days from the date of this
    order. The appeal will be reinstated upon receipt of the supplemental record. Appellant’s
    brief on the merits will be due thirty days after the supplemental record is filed.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    PER CURIAM
    Do not publish.
    TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    Delivered and filed the
    16th day of July, 2015.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-14-00271-CR

Filed Date: 7/20/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/20/2015