NO. 07-07-0177-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

MARCH 25, 2008

                                       ______________________________

GUADALUPE ROSALES, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 331ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY;

NO. D-1-DC-06-500380; HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Appellant, Guadalupe Rosales, was convicted of two counts of sexual assault. Appellant was sentenced to 15 years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, with the sentences to run concurrently. Appellant appeals these convictions. We affirm.

          Appellant’s attorney has filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 498 (1967). In support of her motion to withdraw, counsel certifies that she has diligently reviewed the record and, in her opinion, the record reflects no reversible error upon which an appeal can arguably be predicated. Id. at 744-45. In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), counsel has candidly discussed why, under the controlling authorities, there is no error in the trial court’s judgments. Additionally, counsel has certified that she has provided appellant a copy of the Anders brief and motion to withdraw and appropriately advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response in this matter. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). The court has also advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response. Appellant has not filed a response.

          By her Anders brief, counsel raises grounds that could possibly support an appeal, but concludes the appeal is frivolous. We have made an independent review of the entire record to determine whether there are any arguable grounds which might support an appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005). We have found no such arguable grounds and agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous.

          Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is hereby granted and the trial court’s judgments are affirmed.

                                                                           Mackey K. Hancock

                                                                                     Justice

Do not publish.

sess narcotics do not generally leave them lying around, and 11) the rock substance appeared fresh because it had not yet begun to crumble or dissolve. Given what could be viewed as appellant’s attempt to evade detention, the criminal history surrounding the motel from which appellant left, the time of night, appellant’s length of stay at the motel, and the other evidence mentioned above, a rational jury could logically infer, beyond a reasonable doubt, not only that appellant knew the contraband was there but also that he knowingly exercised care, custody, or control over it.

Appellant’s father did testify that he had rented the vehicle and that he allowed his five sons, adult grandchildren, and friends to drive it. However, he did not know who had driven the vehicle the day appellant was detained in it. While this information suggests that others had access to and drove the car, without more, this falls short of being some evidence tending to illustrate that anyone else had actually driven it immediately before appellant did. Nor can one reasonably infer from it, without more, that any of the other relatives or friends who had the opportunity to drive the car left the cocaine in it. Consequently, we do not find this or any other evidence of record of such persuasiveness as to undermine our confidence in the verdict.

Because both the verdict and judgment had the support of legally and factually sufficient evidence, we overrule appellant’s issues and affirm the judgment.

                                                                Brian Quinn

                                                               Chief Justice

Do not publish.