Erasmo Alvarez v. The State of Texas Appeal from 187th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-18-00337-CR Erasmo ALVAREZ, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 187th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015CR4559 Honorable Joey Contreras, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Delivered and Filed: January 30, 2019 AFFIRMED Erasmo Alvarez pleaded no contest to four separate offenses of credit/debit card abuse pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement. The trial court assessed punishment at 4 years’ deferred adjudication community supervision and fined Alvarez $1,000.00. Thereafter, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt and to revoke Alvarez’s community supervision. During a revocation hearing held on March 21, 2018, Alvarez pleaded true to two allegations he violated the terms of his community supervision. The trial court revoked Alvarez’s community supervision, adjudicated him guilty, and sentenced him to 18 months’ imprisonment. 04-18-00337-CR Alvarez’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel concludes the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Alvarez 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.). Alvarez 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 Alvarez wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Alvarez must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or Alvarez 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.
