_____
AFFIRM; and Opinion issued March i 2013.
In The
Qlourt of Ztppeat
jfiftj itrtct of exa at aUa
No. 05- 12-00733-CR
I)OMINGO SANTINO CAR VA.JAL, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court
I)allas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. FlO-52736-R
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Moseley. O’Neill, and Lewis
Opinion by Justice Lewis
Domingo Santino Carvajal appeals from the revocation of his community supervision.
The trial court convicted appellant of felony DWI and assessed punishment at ten years’
imprisonment. See TEx. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.04(a), 49.09(b)(2) (West Supp. 2012). On
appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous
and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. C’alifornia, 386 U.S. 738
(1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there
are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App.
IPanel Op1 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of
his right to file a pro se response, hut he did not file a pro se response.
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. Bledwe 1. State, 178 S.W.3d 24.
827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate courts duty in Anders cases). We agree the
appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
DAVID LEWIS
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEx. R. ApP. P.47
12073 3F1.J05
-2-
Qtourt of ppeat
jfiftb Oitrict of exa at afta
JUDGMENT
DOMINGO SANTINO CAR VAJAL. Appeal from the 265th Judicial District
Appellant Court of Dallas County. Texas (Tr.CLNo.
Fl 052736R).
No, 05l2O0733CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Lewis,
Justices Moseley and O’Neill participating.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date. the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered March 1. 2013.
J —
DAVID LEWIS
JUSTICE