Jesus Eguia v. State

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 3, 2006

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 3, 2006.

 

 

In The

 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-06-00103-CR

____________

 

JESUS EGUIA, Appellant

 

V.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1031452

 

 

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty, without an agreed recommendation as to punishment, to indecency with a child.[1] On January 13, 2006, trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for two years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.


Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991).  As of this date, more than sixty days has passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed August 3, 2006.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Seymore.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).



[1]  The record contains conflicting information about whether a plea agreement existed.  This court  requested the trial court to execute a corrected certification of the defendant=s right of appeal, and the court certified that no plea bargain exists and appellant has the right to appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).