Ignacio Salas v. the State of Texas

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00122-CR Ignacio SALAS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 81st Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas Trial Court No. 17-12-00129-CRK Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Irene Rios, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 9, 2021 AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED

Ignacio Salas was convicted by a jury of three counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child younger than 14 years of age, a first-degree felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 22.021(a)(1)(B), (a)(2)(B), (e). At punishment, Salas pled true to an enhancement for a prior felony conviction which raised the minimum sentence of imprisonment to fifteen years on each count. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.42 (c)(1). The trial court sentenced Salas to forty years’ imprisonment on each count, with the sentences running consecutively. Salas appealed.

Salas’ court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and a motion to withdraw. In the brief, counsel raises no arguable appellate issues, and concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the Anders requirements. See id.; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). As required, counsel provided Salas with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and informed him of the right to receive a copy of the appellate record and to file his own pro se brief. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Salas did not file a pro se brief. After reviewing the appellate record and counsel’s brief, we conclude there is no reversible error and agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed, and appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. 1 Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177.

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH