Opinion
No. 11-06-00156-CR
Opinion filed February 15, 2007.
On Appeal from the 118th District Court Howard County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 11567.
Panel consists of: WRIGHT, C.J., MCCALL, J., and STRANGE, J.
OPINION
The jury convicted Jesse Nunez Torres of aggravated robbery. Appellant entered pleas of true to both enhancement allegations. The jury assessed his punishment at confinement for life. We modify and affirm.
Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel's brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969); Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2005, no pet.).
Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record; and we agree that the appeal is without merit. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 66. Black v. State, No. 11-06-00273-CR, 2007 WL 431005 (Tex.App.-Eastland Feb. 8, 2007, no pet. h.).
The motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment is modified to reflect that appellant entered pleas of true to the enhancement allegations and, as modified, is affirmed.