Opinion
No. 01-02-01046-CR
Opinion issued June 19, 2003 Do not publish. Tex.R.App.P. 47.4.
On Appeal from the 351st District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. 837965 867405
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Ruben Navarro Barrios, was indicted in cause number 837965 for aggravated sexual assault. Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant was placed on 10 years' deferred adjudication, fined $750, and ordered to complete 400 hours of community service. Thereafter, appellant violated conditions of his community supervision, and the State filed a motion to adjudicate cause number 837965. Appellant was also indicted in cause number 867405 for failure to register as a sex offender. Appellant accepted the State's plea-bargain recommendations and was sentenced to 12 years' confinement in cause number 837965 and two years' confinement in cause number 867405, to run concurrently. We affirm. Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds of error to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref'd). The brief states that a copy was delivered to appellant, whom counsel advised by letter of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We find no reversible error in the record and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw from the case. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).
Counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of his appeal and also to inform appellant that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997).