Joshua Alfonso Vasquez v. The State of TexasAppeal from 264th District Court of Bell County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00247-CR Joshua Alfonso Vasquez, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 70217, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an appeal pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Appellant Joshua Alfonso Vasquez pleaded guilty to the offense of burglary of a habitation. See Tex. Penal Code ยง 30.02. The record reflects that it was an open plea, with no sentencing agreement. At the plea hearing, the district court admonished Vasquez of his rights and asked him questions to ensure that he understood his rights and that he was freely and voluntarily waiving those rights. Vasquez then pleaded guilty and judicially confessed to committing the offense. The district court withheld a finding of guilt and reset the cause for sentencing pending the preparation of a pre-sentence investigation report. At the sentencing hearing, the only witness to testify was Vasquez s sister, who claimed that she was willing to have Vasquez live with her if he was placed on probation. At the conclusion of the hearing, the district court found Vasquez guilty of the offense as charged and sentenced him to fifteen years imprisonment. This appeal followed. Vasquez s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. at 744-45; see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Vasquez was mailed a copy of counsel s brief and advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. We have reviewed the record and counsel s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. __________________________________________ Bob Pemberton, Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Field Affirmed Filed: August 30, 2013 Do Not Publish 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.
