Elijah Zuriel Lopez v. State ( 2020 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-19-00305-CR
Elijah Zuriel Lopez, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 453RD DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY
NO. CR-18-1221, THE HONORABLE DAVID JUNKIN, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Elijah Zuriel Lopez was charged with committing aggravated robbery. See Tex.
Penal Code §§ 29.02-.03. After a jury trial, Lopez was found guilty of the charged offense and
sentenced to twenty-five years’ imprisonment. See id. §§ 12.32, 29.03(b). Following his
conviction, Lopez appealed the district court’s judgment of conviction.
Lopez’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw
supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel’s brief
meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the
record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738,
744-45 (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) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of “assisting the
court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case
and that the appeal is . . . frivolous”). Lopez’s counsel has represented to the Court that he
provided copies of the motion and brief to Lopez; advised Lopez of his right to examine the
appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of
the appeal in this Court; and provided Lopez with a form motion for pro se access to the
appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313,
319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Lopez has not requested a copy of the appellate record or filed a
pro se brief, and the time permitted to file a brief has expired.
We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might
arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We
agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw and affirm the district court’s judgment of conviction.
__________________________________________
Thomas J. Baker, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Baker and Triana
Affirmed
Filed: January 30, 2020
Do Not Publish
2