TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-14-00022-CR
Manuel Moreno, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 299TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-DC-10-300666, HONORABLE KAREN SAGE, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Manuel Moreno pled guilty to the charge of indecency with a child by
exposure in accordance with a plea agreement. See Tex. Penal Code § 21.11(a)(2), (d). The trial
court accepted the plea agreement and placed appellant on deferred adjudication probation for a
period of five years. A few months later, the State filed a motion to adjudicate, alleging numerous
violations of the deferred adjudication. The trial court revoked appellant’s probation, adjudicated
him guilty of the offense of indecency with a child by exposure, and sentenced him to nine years in
prison. See id. § 12.34 (punishment range for third-degree felony is minimum of two years and
maximum of ten years).
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements
of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45
(1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 80-82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he provided copies
of the motion and brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record,
file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following dismissal of this appeal as frivolous;
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. Although appellant requested and
received the appellate record and additional time to file a pro se brief, that time has run and no
pro se brief has been filed.
We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might
arguably support the appeal. 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 appeal
is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment
of conviction.1
1
No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wish to seek further review of
his 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. See generally Tex. R. App.
P. 68-79 (governing proceedings in Court of Criminal Appeals). Any petition for discretionary
review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the date that this Court
overrules the last timely motion for rehearing filed. See id. R. 68.2. The petition must be filed with
the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(a). If the petition is mistakenly filed with
this Court, it will be forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(b). Any petition for
discretionary review should comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See id. R. 68.4. Once this
Court receives notice that a petition has been filed, the filings in this case cause will be forwarded
to the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.7.
2
__________________________________________
David Puryear, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field
Affirmed
Filed: January 9, 2015
Do Not Publish
3