Reynaldo Arizmendez v. State

Opinion issued August 26, 2004 N In The (game/W For The @5255 @Em fflé’m NO. 01-03-01294-CR REYNALDO ARiZMENDEZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 248th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 948992 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Reynaldo Arizmendez, pleaded guilty to indecency with a child and true to two enhancement paragraphs alleging prior felony convictions. After preparation of a presentence investigation report, the trial court found appeilant guilty of indecency with a child and assessed punishment at confinement for 30 years. We affirm. Appeliant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements ofAnders v. California, 386 US. 73 8, 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 [lst 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 appeliate record and file a pro se brief. See Sraflord v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 199 i ). More than 30 days have passed, and appeilant has not filed a pro as brief. We have carefuliy reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. to We grant counsel’s motion to Withdran See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App—Houston [lst Dist] 2000, no pet). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Alaska, and Higley. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.203). Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of his appeal and also to inform him that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminai Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).