Lorenzo Wesley Espitia, Jr. v. The State of Texas Appeal from 27th District Court of Bell County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-17-00142-CR Lorenzo Wesley Espitia, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 76148, HONORABLE JOHN GAUNTT, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Lorenzo Wesley Espitia, Jr. was charged with possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, less than one gram, see Tex. Health & Safety Code § 481.115(b), a state-jail felony enhanced to a second-degree felony by means of his plea of “true” to two prior felony convictions, see Tex. Penal Code § 12.425(b). Espitia entered a plea of guilty, and the trial court assessed his punishment at five years in the Texas Department of Criminal JusticeInstitutional Division. 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 by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 86–87 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he has provided copies of the motions and the brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; 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. Smith, 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. To date, the Court has not received any filing from appellant. We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate counsel’s brief, and find no reversible error. 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 record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. ___________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Justice Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Field and Bourland Affirmed Filed: June 15, 2017 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.
