From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In Matter of G.L.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Apr 14, 2010
No. 04-09-00387-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 14, 2010)

Opinion

No. 04-09-00387-CV

Delivered and Filed: April 14, 2010.

Appealed from the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2009-JUV-01038, Honorable Carmen Kelsey, Judge Presiding.

Affirmed; Motion To Withdraw Granted.

Sitting: CATHERINE STONE, Chief Justice, PHYLIS J. SPEEDLIN, Justice, MARIALYN BARNARD, Justice.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Without a plea agreement, G.L. pled true to the State's petition alleging he committed the offense of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. The trial court found that G.L. engaged in delinquent conduct by committing the felony offense of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, and determined there was a need for disposition for purposes of his rehabilitation and protection of the public. After the disposition hearing, the trial court ordered G.L. committed to the Texas Youth Commission. G.L. filed a notice of appeal.

G.L.'s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an appellant's brief in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal and this appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 299 (Tex. 1998) (applying Anders procedure to juvenile proceedings); see also In re A.L.H., 974 S.W.2d 359, 360-61 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1998, no pet.) ( Anders procedures apply to juvenile appeals). Counsel represents that he has provided the juvenile and his parent with copies of the brief and motion to withdraw, and has informed them of the juvenile's right to review the record and file his own appellant's brief. See In re A.L.H., 974 S.W.2d at 360-61; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (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 pro se brief was filed.

After reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we conclude there is no reversible error and agree with counsel that the appeal is 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. The motion to withdraw filed by G.L.'s counsel is granted. Id.; Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n. 1.


Summaries of

In Matter of G.L.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
Apr 14, 2010
No. 04-09-00387-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 14, 2010)
Case details for

In Matter of G.L.

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF G.L

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio

Date published: Apr 14, 2010

Citations

No. 04-09-00387-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 14, 2010)