Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas 10-24-00173-CR

Susie Bianca Magallanes, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

On appeal from the 21st District Court of Burleson County, Texas Hon. Reva Towslee Corbett, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 16595 CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court found Susie Bianca Magallanes violated eight terms and conditions of her deferred adjudication community supervision for possession of a controlled substance and tampering or fabricating physical evidence with intent to impair. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115; TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 37.09(c). As a result, the trial court found Smith guilty of each count, assessed Smith’s punishment at two years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice State Jail Division on each count, and ordered that they run concurrently. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.35. This appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Magallanes’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous.

See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

Counsel’s brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, “after a full examination of all the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 349–50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is “wholly frivolous” or “without merit” when it “lacks any basis in law or fact.” McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we have determined Magallanes v. State Page 2 the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826– (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Magallanes is granted.

MATT JOHNSON Chief Justice OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: February 27, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirmed Do Not Publish CR25

Magallanes v. State Page 3