COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00432-CR
Albino Perez Salas § From County Criminal Court No. 6
§ of Tarrant County (1240578)
v. § January 17, 2013
§ Per Curiam
The State of Texas § (nfp)
JUDGMENT
This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that
there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of
the trial court is affirmed.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
PER CURIAM
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00432-CR
ALBINO PEREZ SALAS APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 6 OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellant Albino Perez Salas was convicted following a jury trial and
sentenced to six months’ incarceration for the misdemeanor offense of indecent
exposure. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.08(a) (West 2011).
Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. In the brief, counsel
avers that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2
and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87
S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and
demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for appeal. See Stafford v.
State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d
920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). This court gave Appellant
the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did not do so. The State
did not file a brief.
Once an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on
the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we
are obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record to see if
there is any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf. See Stafford, 813
S.W.2d at 511; Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 923. Only then may we grant counsel’s
motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346,
351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in
the record that arguably might support any appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d
763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Accordingly, we grant the motion to withdraw
and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
3
PER CURIAM
PANEL: GARDNER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: January 17, 2013
4