Jesus Hinojosa Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 248th District Court of Harris County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued October 23, 2008 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ____________ NOS. 01-08-00105-CR 01-08-00106-CR ____________ JESUS HINOJOSA, JR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 248th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 1110696 and 1104408 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Jesus Hinojosa, Jr., pleaded guilty to two separate felony offenses of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance. After a presentence investigation hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant in each case to confinement for 45 years. We affirm. Appellant s counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the records present no reversible error, that the appeals are without merit and are frivolous, and that the appeals must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App.1978). Counsel represents that he has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. Having reviewed the record and counsel s brief, we agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 82627(Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We affirm the judgments of the trial court and grant counsel s motion to withdraw.1 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). 2 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Nuchia and Higley. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 3
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.
