Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-20-00358-CR
Ernest GONZALES,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas
Trial Court No. 18-05-0171-CRA
Honorable Lynn Ellison, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Delivered and Filed: June 23, 2021
AFFIRMED, MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED
A jury convicted appellant, Ernest Gonzales, of one count of aggravated sexual assault of
a child and two counts of indecency with a child by sexual contact. The trial court sentenced
Gonzales to thirty-five years’ confinement for aggravated sexual assault of a child and twenty
years’ confinement for each count of indecency with a child by sexual contact, with the sentences
to run concurrently.
The court-appointed appellate attorney for Gonzales filed a motion to withdraw and a brief
in which he concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief demonstrates a
04-20-00358-CR
professional and thorough evaluation of the record and meets the requirements of Anders v.
California, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967) and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
Counsel sent copies of the brief and motion to withdraw to Gonzales, informed him of his rights
in compliance with the requirements of Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014),
and provided a copy of the appellate record. See also Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.) (per curiam); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). This court notified Gonzales of the deadline to file a pro se
brief. Gonzales did not file a pro se brief.
We have thoroughly reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no arguable grounds
for appeal exist and have decided 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
appointed counsel and affirm the trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns,
924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.
No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Gonzales 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 must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for
discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last
timely motion for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition
for discretionary review must be filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3.
Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.
Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Do not publish
-2-