Jesus Barajas Gonzalez v. State

Summarize Case

Related Cases

















In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________



No. 06-09-00072-CR

______________________________





JESUS BARAJAS GONZALEZ, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee





On Appeal from the 294th Judicial District Court

Van Zandt County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR07-00025









Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter



MEMORANDUM OPINION



Jesus Barajas Gonzalez appeals from his conviction by a jury for indecency with a child by sexual contact. The trial judge sentenced Gonzalez to twelve years' imprisonment and a $2,500.00 fine. (1) Gonzalez was represented by appointed counsel at trial and on appeal.

Gonzalez's attorney has filed a brief which discusses the record and reviews the proceedings. Counsel has thus provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. This meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).

Counsel mailed a copy of the brief to Gonzalez on September 9, 2009, informing Gonzalez of his right to file a pro se response and to review the record. Counsel has also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. Gonzalez has neither filed a pro se response, nor has he requested an extension of time in which to file such a response.

We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In a frivolous appeal situation, we are to determine whether the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and if so, the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders, 386 U.S. 738.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court. (2)





Jack Carter

Justice



Date Submitted: November 19, 2009

Date Decided: November 20, 2009



Do Not Publish

1.

Originally appealed to the Twelfth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 73.001 (Vernon 2005).

2.

Since we agree this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel's request to withdraw from further representation of Gonzalez in this case. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Gonzalez wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Gonzalez must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or Gonzalez must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing that was overruled by this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with this Court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals along with the rest of the filings in this case. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.4.

n="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                         In The

                                                Court of Appeals

                        Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

 

                                                ______________________________

 

                                                             No. 06-11-00071-CR

                                                ______________________________

 

 

                                   DOUGLAS JAMES LANE, Appellant

 

                                                                V.

 

                                     THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

                                                                                                  

 

 

                                         On Appeal from the 7th Judicial District Court

                                                             Smith County, Texas

                                                       Trial Court No. 007-1471-10

 

                                                                                                   

 

 

 

                                          Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

                                        Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss

                                                     MEMORANDUM  OPINION

 

            Douglas James Lane, appellant, has filed with this Court a motion to dismiss his appeal, originally filed in the Tyler Court of Appeals.[1]  The motion is signed by Lane and by his counsel in compliance with Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  As authorized by Rule 42.2, we grant the motion.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2.

            Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

 

 

                                                                        Josh R. Morriss, III

                                                                        Chief Justice

 

Date Submitted:          May 6, 2011

Date Decided:             May 9, 2011

 

Do Not Publish          

 

 


[1]Originally appealed to the Twelfth Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts.  See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001 (Vernon 2005).  We are unaware of any conflict between precedent of the Twelfth Court of Appeals and that of this Court on any relevant issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 41.3.