From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vargas v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Oct 27, 2016
NO. 03-16-00083-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 27, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 03-16-00083-CR

10-27-2016

Isidro Vargas, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY, 207TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. CR2015-114, HONORABLE R. BRUCE BOYER, JUDGE PRESIDINGMEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Isidro Vargas, Jr. pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated with two previous similar convictions. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 49.04, 49.09(b)(2). He also pleaded "true" to several enhancement paragraphs. See id. § 12.42(d). The trial court assessed punishment at 99 years' imprisonment.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 86-87 (1988).

Appellant's counsel has represented to the Court that he has provided copies of the motion and the brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; and provided appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. Appellant has filed a pro se brief.

We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate counsel's brief and appellant's pro se brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous.

Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

/s/_________

Scott K. Field, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field Affirmed Filed: October 27, 2016 Do Not Publish


Summaries of

Vargas v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Oct 27, 2016
NO. 03-16-00083-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 27, 2016)
Case details for

Vargas v. State

Case Details

Full title:Isidro Vargas, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Oct 27, 2016

Citations

NO. 03-16-00083-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 27, 2016)