From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jasso v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jun 7, 2017
No. 04-16-00322-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 7, 2017)

Opinion

No. 04-16-00322-CR

06-07-2017

Christopher Andrew JASSO, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee


MEMORANDUM OPINION

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 14-2339-CR-B
Honorable William Old, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

Christopher Andrew Jasso appeals the judgment convicting him of three counts of aggravated kidnapping and sentencing him to three concurrent twenty-five year sentences.

Jasso'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). Counsel sent copies of the brief and motion to withdraw to Jasso and informed him of his rights in compliance with the requirements of Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (2014). In response to Jasso's request, this court provided appellant a copy of the appellate record. Jasso then filed a pro se brief.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and Jasso's brief. Jasso's brief does not raise any arguable grounds for appellate review. We conclude the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is 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 Jasso's appointed 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 Jasso wish to seek further review of this case by 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 this opinion is rendered or the last timely motion for rehearing or 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 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.

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH


Summaries of

Jasso v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jun 7, 2017
No. 04-16-00322-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 7, 2017)
Case details for

Jasso v. State

Case Details

Full title:Christopher Andrew JASSO, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Jun 7, 2017

Citations

No. 04-16-00322-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 7, 2017)