Felix Longoria v. State ( 2014 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-13-00603-CR
Felix Longoria, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. B-09-0571-SA, HONORABLE BEN WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal pursuant to Anders v. California.1 In 2010, appellant Felix Longoria
pleaded guilty to the offense of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, which was enhanced to
a first-degree felony based on his prior criminal history.2 Pursuant to a plea agreement, Longoria
was placed on deferred-adjudication community supervision for three years. Subsequently, the State
filed a motion to revoke, alleging that Longoria had violated multiple terms and conditions of his
community supervision. At the hearing on the motion to revoke, Longoria pleaded true to seven of
the thirteen allegations against him and not true to the remaining six allegations. At the conclusion
of the hearing, the district court found all thirteen allegations to be true, adjudicated Longoria guilty
1
386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2
See Tex. Penal Code § 22.02(a)(2).
of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and sentenced him to eleven years’ imprisonment. This
appeal followed.
The evidence presented at the hearing tended to show that on or about May 16, 2009,
Longoria had physically assaulted his wife, Joni Longoria, by strangling her, cutting her stomach
with a pair of scissors, and cutting her back, neck, and head with a disposable razor. The police
officer who had investigated the assault testified that Joni had provided him with details regarding
the incident and that he had observed lacerations on her stomach, neck, back, and head, which he
photographed. The photographs were admitted into evidence at the hearing. Longoria testified in
his defense and denied that he had assaulted his wife. He acknowledged that he had earlier
pleaded guilty to the offense but maintained that he was in fact innocent. Additional evidence tended
to show that Longoria had repeatedly violated the terms of his community supervision by,
among other things, using heroin, failing to pay necessary fines, failing to complete court-ordered
community service, and failing to report to a Substance Abuse Felony Punishment Facility (SAFPF)
for treatment. In his testimony, Longoria admitted to committing some but not all of the violations.
Longoria’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 by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.3 Longoria was mailed a copy of counsel’s brief and
3
See 386 U.S. at 744-45; 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).
2
advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se response. No pro se response
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. Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment adjudicating guilt is affirmed.
___________________________________________
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose
Affirmed
Filed: August 13, 2014
Do Not Publish
3