Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2001

Darcy Lee Oviedo v. State

Darcy Lee Oviedo v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided April 5, 2001

Darcy Lee Oviedo v. State

Opinion



NUMBER 13-00-343-CR


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

DARCY LEE OVIEDO, Appellant,

v.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa


A jury found appellant, Darcy Lee Oviedo, guilty of the offense of aggravated robbery and assessed his punishment at fifteen years imprisonment. This appeal ensued.

A. Appellant's Appeal

Appellant's attorney has filed a brief in which he states that he has reviewed the clerk's record and reporter's record and concludes that appellant's appeal is frivolous and without merit. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation showing why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an appeal. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). In the brief, appellant's attorney also states that he has informed appellant of his right to review the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No such brief has been filed.

Upon receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief, appellate courts must conduct "a full examination of all the proceeding[s] to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have carefully reviewed the appellate record and counsel's brief; find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal; and agree with appellant's counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

B. Counsel's Motion to Withdraw

In accordance with Anders, appellant's attorney has asked permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. We grant the attorney's motion to withdraw. We order appellant's attorney to notify appellant of the disposition of this appeal and of the availability of discretionary review. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).



FEDERICO G. HINOJOSA

Justice



Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 5th day of April, 2001.

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