HUGO ERNESTO VIGIL v. THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 183rd District Court of Harris County

 NUMBERS 13-05-104-CR & 13-05-105-CR

 COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI  - EDINBURG

HUGO ERNESTO VIGIL, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 183rd District Court of Harris County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Ya ez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Ya ez

Appellate Cause Number 13-05-104-CR[1]

On July 11, 2000, in cause number 13-05-104-CR, a jury found appellant, Hugo Ernesto Vigil,[2] guilty of the felony offense of burglary of a habitation with intent to commit aggravated assault.[3] On July 12, 2000, the jury assessed punishment at eight years= community supervision.[4] In 2004, the State filed a motion to revoke community supervision, alleging appellant violated the terms of his community supervision by committing burglary of a habitation with intent to commit theft on July 11, 2004 (appellate cause number 13-05-105-CR).[5] Appellant pleaded Atrue@ to the allegations, the trial court revoked appellant=s community supervision, and sentenced him to eight years= imprisonment.

Appellate Cause Number 13-05-105-CR[6]

On January 10, 2005, in cause number 13-05-105-CR, appellant pleaded guilty to the felony offense of burglary of a habitation with intent to commit theft. The trial court accepted his plea and the jury assessed punishment at twenty years= imprisonment and a $10,000.00 fine.[7] The trial court ordered the sentence in cause number 13-05-105-CR to begin after the sentence in cause number 13-05-104-CR ceased to operate.[8]

In each case, appellant=s counsel has filed a brief with this Court asserting there is no basis for appeal.[9] We agree, and affirm the trial court=s judgments.

 Anders Briefs

According to counsel=s briefs, he has reviewed the clerk=s record and reporter=s record and has concluded that appellant=s appeals are frivolous and without merit.[10] The briefs meet the requirements of Anders as they present a professional evaluation showing why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an appeal in either case.[11] In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there are no errors in the trial court=s judgments. In the briefs, appellant=s counsel states that he has informed appellant of his right to review the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.[12] No such brief has been filed in either case.

Upon receiving a Afrivolous appeal@ brief, the appellate courts must conduct Aa full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.@[13] We have carefully reviewed the appellate record and counsel=s brief in each case. We agree with appellant=s counsel that the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.[14] Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Motion to Withdraw

In accordance with Anders, counsel has asked permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant.[15] An appellate court may grant counsel=s motion to withdraw filed in connection with an Anders brief.[16] We grant counsel=s motion to withdraw in both cases.

We order counsel to advise appellant promptly of the disposition of both cases and the availability of discretionary review.[17]

_______________________

LINDA REYNA YA EZ,

Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Memorandum opinion delivered and

filed this the 20th day of July, 2006.

[1] Trial court cause number 837866 in the 183rd District Court of Harris County, Texas.

[2] Appellant is also known as AJose Roberto Tobar.@

[3] See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 30.02(a)(1) (Vernon 2003).

[4] See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12 ' 4 (Vernon Supp. 2005).

[5] See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 30.02(a)(1) (Vernon 2003).

[6] Trial court cause number 993925 in the 183rd District Court of Harris County, Texas.

[7] See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 12.33 (Vernon 2003).

[8] See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.08 (Vernon Supp. 2005).

[9] See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).

[10] See id.

[11] See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en banc).

[12] See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 693 (Tex. App.BWaco 2001, no pet.).

[13] Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); see Garza v. State, 126 S.W.3d 312, 313 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2004, no pet.).

[14] See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

[15] See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744.

[16] Moore v. State, 466 S.W.2d 289, 291 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 1971); see Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511 (noting that Anders brief should be filed with request for withdrawal from case).

[17] See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).