From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coronado v. State

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Nov 3, 2020
NO. 01-19-00954-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 3, 2020)

Opinion

NO. 01-19-00954-CR

11-03-2020

LAWRENCE CORONADO, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 209th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1578114

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Lawrence Coronado, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of aggravated assault - family member. See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.02. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant to twenty-two years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Counsel's brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal authority. 386 U.S. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Appellant filed a response to counsel's Anders brief on July 27, 2020. Appellant further filed supplements to his response.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal and we conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether "arguable grounds" for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines whether "arguable grounds for appeal" exist by reviewing entire record). We note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Attorney Nicholas Mensch must immediately send appellant the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and 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).

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Lloyd, and Landau. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).


Summaries of

Coronado v. State

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Nov 3, 2020
NO. 01-19-00954-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 3, 2020)
Case details for

Coronado v. State

Case Details

Full title:LAWRENCE CORONADO, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas

Date published: Nov 3, 2020

Citations

NO. 01-19-00954-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 3, 2020)