Carrete v. State

Full title: OSCAR REVELES CARRETE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District

Date published: Jun 20, 2024

No. 10-23-00327-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 20, 2024)

Opinion

10-23-00368-CR

06-20-2024

OSCAR REVELES CARRETE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice.

Do not publish

From the 13th District Court Navarro County, Texas Trial Court No. D39513-CR

Before Gray, Chief Justice, Johnson, Justice and Smith Justice.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

TOM GRAY, Chief Justice.

In an open plea to the court, Oscar Reveles Carrete pled true to 12 violations alleged by the State in its motion to adjudicate a prior deferred adjudication community supervision for the offense of Manufacture/Delivery of a Controlled Substance, Penalty Group One, one gram or more but less than four grams. The trial court adjudicated Carrete guilty and sentenced him to 11 years in prison. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Carrete'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, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (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, 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, 386 U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (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, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (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.

Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Carrete is granted.

Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed June 20, 2024