Marcos Javier Aldaiz v. State of Texas--Appeal from Crim Dist Ct of Jefferson County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-00-318-CR

No. 10-00-319-CR

MARCOS JAVIER ALDAIZ,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 79226 and 79227

O P I N I O N

Marcus Javier Aldaiz pleaded guilty to two charges of aggravated sexual assault without the benefit of a plea recommendation. The court placed Aldaiz on deferred adjudication community supervision in both cases for a period of ten years. Subsequently, the court granted the State s motion to adjudicate Aldaiz s guilt and sentenced him to fifteen years confinement. Aldaiz s counsel has filed an Anders brief. // See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). We notified Aldaiz that he had the right to file a pro se brief or other response, but he has not done so. See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 694 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.).

Counsel has not identified potential sources of error for our review. Instead, counsel reviews the initial plea proceedings and the adjudication and sentencing proceedings and concludes that no issues of arguable merit exist. We have conducted an independent review of the record and agree that there are no issues of arguable merit.

The indictments appear proper on their face and were filed in a court with jurisdiction over the offenses charged. Aldaiz signed a judicial confession in each case; the court followed the plea recommendation; and Aldaiz did not perfect an appeal from the deferred adjudication order. Thus, he cannot now appeal non-jurisdictional errors committed in the initial plea proceedings. See Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661-62 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Ramirez v. State, 36 S.W.3d 660, 663 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet. h.) (per curiam); see also Puente v. State, No. 10-00-203-CR, slip op. at 5, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 3380, at *7 (Tex. App. Waco May 22, 2001, no pet. h.).

Under article 42.12, section 5(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, no appeal may be taken from the court s decision to proceed with an adjudication of guilt. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2001); Connolly v. State, 983 S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).

The punishment assessed is well within the range provided for these offenses. Our review of the punishment phase discloses no improprieties which would give rise to an issue of arguable merit.

Accordingly, we conclude that Aldaiz s appeal presents no issues of arguable merit. Thus, we affirm the judgment. Unless appellate counsel has been allowed to withdraw, counsel must advise the appellant of the result of the appeal and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See Sowels, 45 S.W.3d at 694.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Gray

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed August 29, 2001

Do not publish