From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Salazar v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Aug 5, 2004
Nos. 01-04-00111-CR, 01-04-00124-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 5, 2004)

Opinion

Nos. 01-04-00111-CR, 01-04-00124-CR

Opinion issued August 5, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).

On Appeal from the 177th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause Nos. 948772 and 800070.

Panel consists of Justices NUCHIA, ALCALA, and HIGLEY.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


On September 30, 2003, appellant, Nelson Mauricio Salazar, pleaded guilty to possession with intent to deliver heroin, weighing at least 400 grams, in cause number 948772. On the same date, he pleaded true to the State's motion to revoke community supervision in cause number 800070. There was no plea agreement between appellant and the State in either case. After preparation of a presentence investigation report, the trial court assessed punishment at 17 years' confinement and a $400 fine in cause number 948772, and two years' confinement in state jail and a fine of $500 in cause number 800070. We affirm. Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that these appeals are without merit. Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref'd). Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeals are without merit. We therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw.See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

On May 4, 1999, appellant had pleaded guilty in cause number 800070 to possession of marihuana weighing five pounds or less, but more than four ounces, with an agreed punishment of two years' confinement in state jail, suspended, placement on community supervision for five years, and a $500 fine.

Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of his appeals and also to inform him that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997).


Summaries of

Salazar v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston
Aug 5, 2004
Nos. 01-04-00111-CR, 01-04-00124-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 5, 2004)
Case details for

Salazar v. State

Case Details

Full title:NELSON MAURICIO SALAZAR, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Aug 5, 2004

Citations

Nos. 01-04-00111-CR, 01-04-00124-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 5, 2004)