Roberto Carlos Cruz v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 177th District Court of Harris County

Opinion issued July 19, 2007

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-06-00777-CR

____________

ROBERTO CARLOS CRUZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1063003

MEMORANDUM OPINION (1)

Appellant, Roberto Carlos Cruz, pleaded guilty to the offense of sexual assault of child, and, in accordance with his plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for five years and assessed a $250 fine.

The State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate guilt to which appellant pleaded true. Contemporaneously with his plea of true, appellant, appellant's counsel, and the prosecutor signed a document styled stipulation of evidence that included a judicial confession, and waiver of constitutional rights . The stipulation included among others, the following statements:

I judicially confess that it is true that I violated the terms and conditions of my probation and that the allegations in the attached State's motion are true.

I intend to enter a plea of true to the State's motion.

As part of my agreement with the prosecutor to plead true, I agree to waive any right to appeal I may have concerning any issue or claim in this case, including my plea of true or admission of guilt.

Appellant wrote his initials beside each of the statements. After a hearing, the trial court found to be true the State's allegation that appellant had violated the conditions of his community supervision, and found appellant guilty of the original charge. The trial court sentenced him to confinement for five years and assessed a $250 fine. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App.1978).

Counsel represents that she has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. Having reviewed the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27(Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. (2)

Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Hanks, and Bland.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

1. Hon. Devon Anderson presided. Trial counsel were Juan Contreras, Jr. for appellant and M. Peneguy for the State. Angela Cameron filed the Anders brief.

2. Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).