Hector Corona v. State

Opinion filed July 13, 2006

 

 

Opinion filed July 13, 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                        In The

                                                                             

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                 ____________

 

                                                          No. 11-05-00293-CR

                                                    __________

 

                                      HECTOR CORONA, Appellant

 

                                                             V.

 

                                        STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

                                         On Appeal from the 266th District Court

 

                                                           Erath County, Texas

 

                                                 Trial Court Cause No. CR12150

 

 

                                                                   O P I N I O N

The trial court convicted Hector Corona, upon his plea of guilty, of aggravated sexual assault. A plea bargain agreement was not reached.  The trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for forty years.  We affirm.


Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw.  The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous.  Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel=s brief.  A response has not been filed.  Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.CEastland 2005, no pet.).

Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit.

The motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

July 13, 2006

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J., and

McCall, J., and Strange, J.