David Garcia v. State of Texas--Appeal from 175th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Annotate this Case
No. 04-00-00742-CR
David GARCIA,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1996CR0019W
Honorable Mary Rom n, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice

Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 16, 2001

AFFIRMED

David Garcia ("Garcia") was convicted in 1997 of injury to a child. In accordance with his plea bargain agreement, Garcia was sentenced to two years confinement in a state jail facility, probated for four years. At the time of his plea proceeding, Garcia was fully admonished in writing. See Crawford v. State, 890 S.W.2d 941, 944-45 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1994, no pet.) (prima facie showing that plea was knowing and voluntary established when record reflects that trial court appropriately admonished a defendant). In 1999, the State filed a motion to revoke Garcia's probation. At the hearing on the State's motion to revoke, Garcia pled true to violating the condition of his probation that required him to report to his supervision officer. See Hays v. State, 933 S.W.2d 659, 661 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996, no pet.) (holding plea of true alone sufficient to support revocation).

Garcia's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Garcia with a copy of the brief and informed him of his right to review the record and file his own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellate counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

PHIL HARDBERGER,

CHIEF JUSTICE

DO NOT PUBLISH

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.