Opinion
No. 4-05-00044-CR
Delivered and Filed: January 25, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 1996-CR-1585, Honorable Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding. Motion to Withdraw Granted; Affirmed.
Sitting: Sarah B. DUNCAN, Justice, Karen ANGELINI, Justice, Sandee Bryan MARION, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Isidro Ramirez appeals the trial court's order denying Ramirez's post-conviction motion for DNA testing. We affirm. Ramirez was convicted of aggravated injury to a child and sentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment. Ramirez later filed a motion for forensic DNA testing under Chapter 64 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The State responded that no evidence containing biological material was secured in connection with the offense and supported the response with the affidavit of its records custodian. At the hearing on the motion, counsel for the State reaffirmed that no biological evidence was collected and Ramirez's court-appointed counsel stated that Ramirez alleges "actual innocence" and "do[es] not contest the State's response as to the lack of evidence." The trial court denied the motion and Ramirez appealed. Ramirez'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, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (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). Ramirez was provided a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Ramirez filed a pro se brief in which he contends that counsel rendered ineffective assistance, the State wrongfully withheld x-rays, fingerprint evidence, and photographs depicting finger markings made on the child victim's neck, and that the trial court erred in failing to order "DNA testing to enlarge and compare those markings to appellant's hands." After reviewing the record, counsel's brief, and Ramirez's brief, we find no reversible error and agree with counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State No. PD-300-04, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2005 WL 3057799, *2-*3 (Tex.Crim.App. Nov. 16, 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Ramirez's counsel and affirm the trial court's judgment. See id. at *3; 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.).