Jason M. Sifuentes v. State

MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-11-00718-CR Jason M. SIFUENTES, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2011CR4720 Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 6, 2012 MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED Jason Sifuentes was placed on community supervision for a period of three years after he pled nolo contendere to the charge of failing to register as a sex offender. When the State later moved to revoke his supervision, Sifuentes pled true to violating two conditions of his community supervision. The trial court revoked Sifuentes’s community supervision and sentenced him to three years in prison. Sifuentes timely appealed. 04-11-00718-CR Sifuentes’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which she raises no arguable points of error and concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel certifies she provided Sifuentes a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and informed him of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Although given an opportunity to file a pro se brief, Sifuentes has not done so. After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Sifuentes’s counsel and affirm the trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Sifuentes wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days after either this opinion is rendered or the last timely motion for rehearing or motion for en banc reconsideration is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4. Steven C. Hilbig, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH -2-