Santos Martinez Beltran v. The State of Texas Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 5 of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed November 13, 2017. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-00334-CR No. 05-17-00335-CR SANTOS MARTINEZ BELTRAN, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F12-54606-L, F12-56353-L MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang-Miers, Brown, and Boatright Opinion by Justice Boatright Santos Martinez Beltran waived a jury trial and pleaded guilty before the trial court to the offenses of sexual assault of a child and aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years. After finding appellant guilty, the trial court sentenced him to twenty years’ imprisonment for sexual assault of a child and sixty years’ imprisonment for aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than fourteen years. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are 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, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets requirements of Anders). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel). 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 appeals are 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 appeals. We affirm the trial court’s judgments. /Jason Boatright/ JASON BOATRIGHT JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 170334F.U05 –2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT SANTOS MARTINEZ BELTRAN, Appellant No. 05-17-00334-CR On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12-54606-L. Opinion delivered by Justice Boatright. Justices Lang-Miers and Brown participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered this 13th day of November, 2017. –3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT SANTOS MARTINEZ BELTRAN, Appellant No. 05-17-00335-CR On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12-56353-L. Opinion delivered by Justice Boatright. Justices Lang-Miers and Brown participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered this 13th day of November, 2017. –4–

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.