Arquimides Gonzales Velasquez v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 18, 2004
• Docket: 01-03-00122-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued November 18, 2004 

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-03-00122-CR

ARQUIMIDES GONZALES VELASQUEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 913889

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Arquimedes Gonzales Velasquez, pleaded guilty to felony driving while intoxicated without a plea bargain agreement. After preparation of a presentence investigation report, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for three years. Appellant filed timely notice of appeal and posted an appeal bond.

               The appeal was assigned to this Court, and the appellate record was filed.

               On August 19, 2004, appellant’s retained counsel, Francisco Yeverino and Terry W. Yates, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, having concluded the appeal was meritless. We granted the motion on August 20, 2004. See McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 108 S. Ct. 1895 (1988); Knotts v. State, 31 S.W.3d 821, 822 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.). We further notified appellant in our August 20 order, as follows:

We notify appellant at his last known address, as provided in counsel’s motion, that his brief is due in this Court no later than September 19, 2004. Unless appellant retains counsel who files a brief on or before September 19, 2004, this appeal will be considered by the Court without briefs on the record alone.

               We received no response to our August 20, 2004 order. Therefore, on October 15, 2004, we set the appeal for submission on November 10, 2004 and notified the parties as required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.9. Again, we received no response.

               Accordingly, we consider the appeal without briefs. Only the clerk’s record is presented for review. We have reviewed the record for fundamental error and find none. See Ashcraft v. State, 802 S.W.2d 905, 906 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1991, no pet.); Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708, 708-09 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.).

               We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).