Guillermo Angel Velasquez v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-22-00023-CR
Guillermo Velasquez, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY,
NO. CR2020-852, THE HONORABLE JACK ROBISON, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found Appellant Guillermo Velasquez guilty of two counts of aggravated
assault with a deadly weapon and two counts of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. See Tex.
Penal Code §§ 22.02(a)(2), 31.07. The trial court assessed sentence at forty years in prison on
each of the aggravated assault counts and twenty years in prison on each of the unauthorized use
of a motor vehicle counts. See id. §§ 12.42(d), 12.425(b). He appeals.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel
along with 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. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);
Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has certified to this Court that she sent copies of
the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record
and file a pro se response, and provided a motion to assist appellant in obtaining the record. See
Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S.
at 744.
We have conducted an independent review of the record—including the record of
the plea and sentencing proceedings below and appellate counsel’s brief—and find no reversible
error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,
826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably
meritorious grounds for review and that the appeal is frivolous.
We affirm the judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
__________________________________________
Darlene Byrne, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Smith
Affirmed
Do Not Publish
Filed: December 1, 2022
2