Opinion
No. 04-11-00255-CR
02-15-2012
Francisco MEDINA-RUBIO, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION
From the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas
Trial Court No. 10-05-0131-CRA
Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
Francisco Medina-Rubio was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and aggravated kidnapping. The trial court sentenced Medina-Rubio to twenty years' confinement and seventy years' confinement, respectively, and ordered the terms to run concurrently. Medina-Rubio timely appealed the judgments.
Medina-Rubio'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 states Medina-Rubio was provided a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was further informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Medina-Rubio has not filed a pro se brief.
Counsel is reminded that he should explain the procedure for obtaining the record from the trial court clerk. See Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.).
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 Medina-Rubio's counsel and affirm the trial court's judgments. 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 Medina-Rubio 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.
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Do not publish