Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 1996

Sylvia Ann Vasquez v. State

Sylvia Ann Vasquez v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided January 24, 1996

Sylvia Ann Vasquez v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN





NO. 03-95-00338-CR





Sylvia Ann Vasquez, Appellant



v.



The State of Texas, Appellee





FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 51ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. A-94-0282-S, HONORABLE DICK ALCALA, JUDGE PRESIDING





PER CURIAM



In October 1994, appellant pleaded guilty to aggravated assault. The district court found that the evidence substantiated appellant's guilt, deferred further proceedings, and placed appellant on probation. In April 1995, the court revoked probation on the State's motion, adjudicated appellant guilty, and assessed punishment at imprisonment for three years.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. A discussion of the contentions advanced in counsel's brief would serve no beneficial purpose.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.



Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed: January 24, 1996

Do Not Publish

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.