Ariel Daniel Erives v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 13, 2023
• Docket: 05-21-00557-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed February 13, 2023

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-21-00557-CR

ARIEL DANIEL ERIVES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 380-85054-2019

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Smith, Kennedy,1 and Rosenberg2 Opinion by Justice Rosenberg Ariel Daniel Erives appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery with a

deadly weapon. Erives pleaded guilty, and the trial court found him guilty and

assessed his punishment at eighteen years of imprisonment. The trial court’s

judgment is affirmed.

1 Justice David Schenck was originally a member of this panel. Justice Nancy Kennedy succeeded Justice Schenck on this panel when his term expired on December 31, 2022. 2 The Hon. Barbara Rosenberg, Justice, Assigned. This case was submitted without oral argument. At the time this case was submitted, Justice Leslie Osborne was a member of the panel. After her resignation, Justice Rosenberg was designated to sit on the panel and participated in the decision of this case. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.1. Erives’s attorney filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief in which he

concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the

requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a

professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable

grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel

Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets requirements of Anders). Counsel

delivered a copy of the brief to Erives. The State filed a letter response,

acknowledging receipt of counsel’s Anders brief and stating it had no points with

which to respond. This Court advised Erives of his right to file a pro se response,

but he did not file a response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief

filed by counsel).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s briefs. See Bledsoe v. State, 178

S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court's duty in

Anders cases). Erives was indicted for the offense of aggravated robbery with a

deadly weapon. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03. He waived his right to a jury

trial, pleaded guilty pursuant to an “open plea” without an agreement as to the

punishment he would receive, agreed to the trial court accepting his plea by

broadcast on closed-circuit teleconferencing, and waived his right to appeal his plea

of guilt, but not with respect to his punishment. The record shows Erives signed a

written plea agreement that included admonishments. And the trial court orally

–2– admonished him during the plea hearing, including an admonishment as to the

deportation consequences of his plea. The trial court found Erives guilty based on

his plea and the evidence, and it assessed his punishment at eighteen years of

imprisonment. See PENAL §§ 12.32, 29.03(b).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s briefs. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d

at 826–27 (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree that the

appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might

arguably and substantively support the appeal.

We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment.

/Barbara Rosenberg/ BARBARA ROSENBERG JUSTICE, ASSIGNED

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47

210557F.U05

–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

ARIEL DANIEL ERIVES, Appellant On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas No. 05-21-00557-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. 380-85054- 2019. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Opinion delivered by Justice Rosenberg. Justices Smith and Kennedy participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered February 13, 2023

–4–