Gilbert Carbajal v. State ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-10-00851-CR
    Gilbert Carbajal, Appellant
    v.
    The State of Texas, Appellee
    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    NO. A-10-0084-SB, THE HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    A jury convicted Gilbert Carbajal of the felony offense of evading arrest with a motor
    vehicle. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.04(b)(2)(A) (West 2011). The jury found the enhancement
    paragraphs alleging two prior consecutive non-state jail felony convictions to be true and, pursuant
    to the habitual offender punishment provision, assessed his punishment at confinement for
    thirty years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.42(d)
    (West 2011).
    Carbajal’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
    , 744 (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).
    Carbajal received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine
    the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See 
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 744
    . No pro se brief or other
    written response has been filed.
    We have reviewed the record, including appellate counsel’s brief, and find no
    reversible error. See Garner v. State, 
    300 S.W.3d 763
    , 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State,
    
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is
    frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
    The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
    __________________________________________
    J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice
    Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Henson and Goodwin
    Affirmed
    Filed: November 10, 2011
    Do Not Publish
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-10-00851-CR

Filed Date: 11/10/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/16/2015