From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cuellar v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Sep 11, 2013
No. 04-12-00556-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 11, 2013)

Opinion

No. 04-12-00556-CR

2013-09-11

Jesse CUELLAR, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee


MEMORANDUM OPINION


From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009CR7135

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

In June 2009, appellant Jesse Cuellar was indicted on eight counts of indecency with a child by contact. He pled not guilty. A jury found Cuellar guilty of all eight counts and assessed punishment as follows: twelve years imprisonment and a $1,500 fine on counts 1, 2, 5 and 8; twenty years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine on counts 3 and 4; and fifteen years imprisonment and a $5,000 fine on counts 6 and 7. The trial court ordered all sentences to run concurrently. Cuellar then perfected this appeal.

Cuellar's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he raises no arguable points of error and concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Cuellar was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Cuellar did not file a brief.

After reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we find no reversible error and agree with counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Cuellar's counsel and affirm the trial court's judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Cuellar wish to seek further review of this case in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days after either the day our judgment is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing or timely motion for en banc reconsideration is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

Marialyn Barnard, Justice Do Not Publish


Summaries of

Cuellar v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Sep 11, 2013
No. 04-12-00556-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 11, 2013)
Case details for

Cuellar v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jesse CUELLAR, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Sep 11, 2013

Citations

No. 04-12-00556-CR (Tex. App. Sep. 11, 2013)