Juan J. Cruz v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 290th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

No. 04-99-00302-CR
Juan J. CRUZ,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 98-CR-4982
Honorable Sharon MacRae, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 24, 2001

AFFIRMED

Pursuant to a plea bargain, Juan J. Cruz pled guilty to felony driving while intoxicated, a third offense of driving while intoxicated. The trial court sentenced Cruz within the terms of the plea bargain to three years in prison and a $1,000.00 fine. The sentence was probated for a period of three years, with attendance in AA through the Kendall County Repeat Offenders program and two year suspension of his driver's license.

Cruz filed a motion for new trial which was denied. Cruz's retained counsel on appeal was allowed to withdraw from the case after filing an Anders brief in which he stated there were no arguable points for appeal. (1) Cruz has not indicated he is indigent nor has he filed a brief or made arrangements for an attorney to file a brief on his behalf although this Court advised him if he failed to do so, the appeal would be considered on the record alone. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4), we review the appeal on the record without briefs. See Scotka v. State, 856 S.W.2d 790, 791 n.1 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1993, no pet.).

We have carefully reviewed the record and hold the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Because Cruz was sentenced within the terms of his plea agreement and filed only a general notice of appeal, we have no jurisdiction to consider error other than claims of jurisdictional defects or involuntariness of the guilty plea. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b) (3); Martinez v. State, 5 S.W.3d 722, 725 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1999, no pet.); Luna v. State, 985 S.W.2d 128, 130 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1998, pet. ref'd). We find no evidence of a jurisdictional defect. Cruz was fully admonished by the trial court as to his rights and the consequences of his plea. We find no indication in the record that his plea was not voluntary or that he did not understand the proceedings as explained to him by the court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

1. The Anders brief was struck by this Court. See Johnson v. State, 885 S.W.2d 641, 645 (Tex. App.-Waco 1994, pet. ref'd) (citing McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisc., Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 437 (1988). The cause was then remanded to the trial court to determine whether Cruz was indigent and whether he desired to continue his appeal. The trial court found Cruz was not indigent but there was no evidence he wished to dismiss the appeal.