Manuel Trevino v. State

Becker v. State

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS



MANUEL TREVINO,


                                    Appellant,


v.


THE STATE OF TEXAS,


                                    Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§


§


No. 08-06-00100-CR


Appeal from

227th District Court


of Bexar County, Texas


(TC # 2004CR0442W)


 

 

 


MEMORANDUM OPINION


            Manuel Trevino appeals his conviction of theft over $1,500 but under $20,000. We affirm.

            In 2004, Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered a negotiated plea of guilty. The trial court found that the evidence substantiated a finding of guilt, but deferred adjudication and placed Appellant on community supervision for a term of four years. On February 22, 2005, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt and revoke community supervision. At the hearing on the motion, Appellant entered a plea of true to several allegations and the trial court adjudicated him guilty. The court assessed punishment at a fine of $1,200 and confinement in the state jail for two years. Appellant filed a notice of appeal and the trial court certified that Appellant has a right of appeal.

            Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S. Ct. 2094, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969). A copy of counsel’s brief has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

            We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.



January 11, 2007                                                        

                                                                                    ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice


Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Carr, JJ.


(Do Not Publish)