Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 1998

Guadalupe M. Espinoza v. State

Guadalupe M. Espinoza v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided August 13, 1998

Guadalupe M. Espinoza v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN






NO. 03-98-00041-CR


Guadalupe M. Espinoza, Appellant


v.



The State of Texas, Appellee








FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 26TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 97-065-K26, HONORABLE BILLY RAY STUBBLEFIELD, JUDGE PRESIDING


PER CURIAM

Appellant pleaded guilty to an indictment accusing him of felony driving while intoxicated and true to enhancement paragraphs alleging two previous felony convictions. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, the court assessed punishment at imprisonment for twenty-five years.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed 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 advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. 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). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his 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 Yeakel, Justices Aboussie and Jones

Affirmed

Filed: August 13, 1998

Do Not Publish

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