Isaac Benavidez v. The State of Texas Appeal from 21st District Court of Bastrop County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-14-00494-CR NO. 03-14-00495-CR Isaac Benavidez, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOS. 15,265 & 15,266 HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER DARROW DUGGAN, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION In January 2014, appellant Isaac Benavidez pled guilty to four counts of intentional serious bodily injury to a child and received ten years’ deferred adjudication probation. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.04; Tex. Code Crim Proc. art. 42.12, § 3g. In May 2014, upon finding that appellant had violated certain terms of his probation, the trial court revoked appellant’s deferred adjudication and sentenced him to sixty years’ imprisonment on the first count and ten years’ imprisonment on each of the remaining three counts, to run concurrently. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.12, §23. Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he provided appellant with copies of the brief and accompanying motions to withdraw; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and provided appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. Although appellant requested and received the appellate record and additional time to file a pro se brief, that time has run and no pro se brief has been filed. We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of conviction.1 1 No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wish to seek further review of his case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 68-79 (governing proceedings in Court of Criminal Appeals). Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the date that this Court overrules the last timely motion for rehearing filed. See id. R. 68.2. The petition must be filed with the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(a). If the petition is mistakenly filed with this Court, it will be forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(b). Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the rules of appellate procedure. See id. R. 68.4. Once this Court receives notice that a petition has been filed, the filings in this case cause will be forwarded to the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.7. 2 __________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Bourland Affirmed Filed: July 14, 2015 Do Not Publish 3
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.
