Raul Arthur Morales v. The State of Texas Appeal from 161st District Court of Ector County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed October 20, 2022 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-22-00024-CR __________ RAUL ARTHUR MORALES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 161st District Court Ector County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. C-21-0988-CR MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court convicted Appellant, Raul Arthur Morales, of the offense of possession of a controlled substance: less than one gram of methamphetamine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(a), (b) (West Supp. 2022). The trial court found both enhancement allegations to be true and assessed Appellant’s punishment at imprisonment for ten years and a fine of $500. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.425(a) (West 2019). We affirm. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed in this court a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, and a copy of both the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. Counsel advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Appellant has not filed a response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.1 We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court. PER CURIAM October 20, 2022 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J. We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 1 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
