Jesus Morales Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 119th District Court of Tom Green County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-08-00112-CR
Jesus Morales Jr., Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. B-07-0694-S, HONORABLE JAY K. WEATHERBY, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found appellant Jesus Morales, Jr., guilty of the unlawful possession of a
firearm by a felon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 46.04 (West Supp. 2008). The jury assessed his
punishment, enhanced by two previous felony conviction, at imprisonment for twenty-five years.
A pickup truck being driven by appellant’s brother was stopped for speeding by
Trooper Carlos Diaz. Diaz subsequently arrested appellant’s brother on an outstanding warrant and
for driving while his license was suspended. Diaz arrested appellant, who was also in the truck,
for public intoxication. Diaz found a shotgun and a .22 rifle in the truck. The vehicle and both
firearms belonged to the brothers’ employer, Leland Key. Key testified that he had given appellant’s
brother possession of the truck and the shotgun for employment-related use. Key did not know how
the .22 rifle came to be in the truck. The rifle had been taken without his knowledge from a trailer
house on his property.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684
(Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous
v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). After receiving a copy of counsel’s brief and
examining the appellate record, appellant filed a pro se brief.
We have reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the pro se brief. We agree that
the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Jan P. Patterson, Justice
Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson
Affirmed
Filed: December 19, 2008
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.
