Opinion
03-23-00114-CR
08-27-2024
Francisco Esquivel, III, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
Do Not Publish
From the 207th District Court of Comal County No. CR2019-226, the Honorable Dib Waldrip, Judge Presiding
Before Justices Baker, Triana, and Smith
MEMORANDUM OPINION
EDWARD SMITH, JUSTICE
Francisco Esquivel, III, was charged with the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. See Tex. Penal Code § 38.10. The indictment included four enhancement paragraphs alleging that Esquivel had previously been convicted of the following four felony offenses: one count of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon, two counts of possession of a controlled substance, and one count of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. See Tex. Health & Safety Code §§ 481.112, .115, Tex. Penal Code § 46.04. Following a jury trial on guilt-innocence, the jury found Esquivel guilty. During the punishment hearing, Esquivel pleaded true to the four enhancement allegations, and the trial court sentenced him to 50 years' imprisonment. See Tex. Penal Code § 12.42. Esquivel appealed his conviction.
Esquivel's court-appointed attorney on appeal filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief contending that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Esquivel's court-appointed attorney's brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id.; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of "assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous"). Esquivel's counsel represented to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Esquivel; advised Esquivel of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and provided Esquivel with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Esquivel has not filed a pro se brief challenging his conviction, and the deadline for filing a pro se brief has expired.
We have independently reviewed the record and considered appellate counsel's brief, and we have found nothing that might arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgments of conviction.
Affirmed.