Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-20-00326-CR Leonard CHARGUALAF, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 16-1243-CR-A Honorable William D. Old III, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice Delivered and Filed: March 9, 2022 AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED Appellant Leonard Chargualaf pled guilty to two counts of the first degree felony offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child and three counts of the second degree felony offense of indecency with a child by sexual contact. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 22.021, 21.11. On April 20, 2018, the trial court ordered that adjudication of guilt be deferred, and it placed Chargualaf on community supervision for eight years. On August 21, 2019, the State filed motions, seeking adjudication of guilt and the revocation of Chargualaf’s community supervision. On December 12, 2019, the trial court held a revocation hearing and, after receiving evidence, modified the conditions of Chargualaf’s community supervision. On June 8, 2020, the trial court held a status 04-20-00326-CR

hearing and found that Chargualaf had violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision. The trial court revoked Chargualaf’s community supervision, adjudicated him guilty of the charged offenses, and assessed a sentence of a $988.12 fine and incarceration for twenty years, crediting Chargualaf for the time he served while incarcerated on the charges. Chargualaf now appeals.

Chargualaf’s court-appointed 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.

Counsel concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided Chargualaf with a copy of the brief and the motion to withdraw as well as a copy of the appellate record.

Counsel also informed Chargualaf of his right to review the record and to file his own 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.) (per curiam); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Chargualaf thereafter filed a pro se brief, and the State filed a brief in response.

After reviewing the record and the briefs, we conclude there is no reversible error and agree with Chargualaf’s 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 See Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice DO NOT PUBLISH No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Chargualaf wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals, see id. R. 68.3, and any such petition must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

-2-