Mark Anthony Ramos v. The State of Texas Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County (opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
MODIFY and AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed January 27, 2016. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-15-01228-CR MARK ANTHONY RAMOS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15-51172-I MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Schenck Mark Anthony Ramos waived a jury and pleaded guilty to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a) (West 2011). The trial court assessed punishment at ten years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases). Appellant filed a pro se response raising several issues. After reviewing counsel’s brief, appellant’s pro se response, and the record, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Although not an arguable issue, we note the trial court’s judgment incorrectly states there was a plea bargain agreement. The record reflects appellant entered an open plea of guilty to the charge in the indictment. Accordingly, we modify the section of the judgment entitled “terms of plea bargain” to state “open.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(b); Bigley v. State, 865 S.W.2d 26, 27– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Asberry v. State, 813 S.W.2d 526, 529–30 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1991, pet. ref'd). As modified, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. /David J. Schenck/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 151228F.U05 -2- Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MARK ANTHONY RAMOS, Appellant No. 05-15-01228-CR Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. F15-51172-I). Opinion delivered by Justice Schenck, Justices Bridges and Lang-Miers participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is MODIFIED as follows: The section entitled “Terms of Plea Bargain” is modified to show “Open.” As modified, we AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment. Judgment entered January 27, 2016. -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.
