Opinion
No. 04-14-00902-CR
09-09-2015
Luis JARAMILLO, Jr., Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION
From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2012CR2228
Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Jason Pulliam, Justice AFFIRMED
Luis Jaramillo, Jr. pled true to violating the conditions of his community supervision, and the trial court revoked his community supervision and sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment. Jaramillo's court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Jaramillo with a copy of the brief and informed him of his right to review the record and file his own brief. See 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.). Jaramillo obtained a copy of the record and filed a pro se brief.
After reviewing the record, counsel's brief, and Jaramillo's pro se brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellate counsel's request to withdraw is granted. Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Jaramillo wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Jaramillo must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or Jaramillo must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the later of: (1) the date of this opinion; or (2) the date the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.
Because we have determined that the appeal is frivolous, we do not address any of the issues raised by Jaramillo in his pro se brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). --------
Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice DO NOT PUBLISH