From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guajardo v. State

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Feb 19, 2020
No. 10-19-00439-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 19, 2020)

Opinion

No. 10-19-00439-CR

02-19-2020

JUAN RODRIGUEZ GUAJARDO, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2014-1196-C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Juan Rodriguez Guajardo was convicted of continuous sexual abuse of a young child (Count I) and indecency with a child by contact (Count II). The jury assessed Guajardo's punishment at life imprisonment for Count I and twenty years' imprisonment for Count II. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. This is the appeal of his indecency-with-a-child-by-contact (Count II) conviction.

Guajardo's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all the proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment as to Count II.

Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Guajardo as to Count II is granted.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill
Affirmed; motion granted
Opinion delivered and filed February 19, 2020
Do not publish
[CRPM]


Summaries of

Guajardo v. State

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Feb 19, 2020
No. 10-19-00439-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 19, 2020)
Case details for

Guajardo v. State

Case Details

Full title:JUAN RODRIGUEZ GUAJARDO, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Date published: Feb 19, 2020

Citations

No. 10-19-00439-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 19, 2020)