Opinion issued February 9, 2012.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01-10-00500-CR
____________
RUY ENRIQUE PEREZ, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 176th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1142038
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Ruy Enrique Perez, pleaded guilty without an agreed punishment recommendation to murder. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.02) (Vernon 2011). After preparation of a pretrial sentence investigation, the trial court assessed punishment at 50 years’ confinement. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along with an Anders brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and therefore the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).
Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel discusses the evidence adduced at the trial, supplies us with references to the record, and provides us with citation to legal authorities. Counsel indicates that she has thoroughly reviewed the record and that she is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 154 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
Here, counsel’s brief reflects that she delivered a copy of the brief to appellant and informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a response. See id. at 408. Appellant has filed a pro se response.
In his pro se response, appellant contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because (1) his plea was involuntary because counsel promised him that he would receive deferred adjudication if he pleaded guilty and (2) trial counsel should have had him declared incompetent to stand trial. There is nothing in the record to support either of appellant’s allegations.
We have independently reviewed the entire record, and we conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, that there are no arguable grounds for review, and that therefore the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (explaining that frivolity is determined by considering whether there are “arguable grounds” for review); Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826-27 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether the appeal is wholly frivolous); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155. An appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d 827 & n.6.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.[1] Attorney, Francis M. Northcutt, must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.5(c).
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Sharp, and Brown.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
[1] Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).