Gabriel Antonio Valverde v. The State of Texas Appeal from 437th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-16-00633-CR Gabriel Antonio VALVERDE, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2016CR4166W Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Delivered and Filed: July 12, 2017 AFFIRMED Appellant Gabriel Antonio Valverde was charged with and convicted of the offense of Burglary of a Vehicle — 3rd or more. Pursuant to a plea bargain, the trial court placed him on community supervision for a period of four years. The State later filed a motion to revoke community supervision. After Valverde pled “true” to violating three separate conditions of his community supervision, the trial court revoked Valverde’s community supervision and found him guilty of the charged offense. The trial court assessed punishment at fifteen months’ confinement in a state jail facility. 04-16-00633-CR Appellant’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he raises no arguable issues and concludes this appeal is without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel provided Valverde 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.). Valverde did not file a pro se brief. After reviewing 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 request to withdraw is granted. Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Valverde wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Valverde must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or Valverde must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the later of: (1) the date of this opinion; or (2) the date the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4. Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH -2-
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.
