Luis Rivera a/k/a Luis Rivera Cintron v. The State of Texas Appeal from 35th District Court of Brown County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed December 5, 2019 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________ No. 11-19-00049-CR ___________ LUIS RIVERA A/K/A LUIS RIVERA CINTRON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 35th District Court Brown County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CR26135 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Luis Rivera a/k/a Luis Rivera Cintron, waived a jury and entered an open plea of guilty to sexual assault of a child. Appellant also pleaded true to a felony enhancement allegation, and the trial court ordered a presentence investigation report. The trial court convicted Appellant, found the habitual- offender enhancement allegation to be true, and assessed Appellant’s punishment at confinement for life. We affirm. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed 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 without merit as there are no arguable issues to raise in this appeal. Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of 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 in order to seek review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. 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 subsequently filed a response to counsel’s Anders brief. We have reviewed Appellant’s response. In addressing an Anders brief and a pro se response, a court of appeals may only determine (1) that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error or (2) that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues. Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree with counsel that no arguable grounds for appeal exist.1 1 We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 68. 2 We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court. PER CURIAM December 5, 2019 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.2 Willson, J., not participating. 2 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment. 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.
