Cantu, Juan Gabriel v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 8, 2002
Docket14-01-01029-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Cantu, Juan Gabriel v. State (Cantu, Juan Gabriel v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Cantu, Juan Gabriel v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion filed August 8, 2002

Affirmed and Opinion filed August 8, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-01-01029-CR

JUAN GABRIEL CANTU, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 178th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 862,125

M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N

Following a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of attempted capital murder.  On September 13, 2001, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for life  in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and a  $10,000.00 fine.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal.


Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed August 8, 2002.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Frost.

Do not publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cantu, Juan Gabriel v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cantu-juan-gabriel-v-state-texapp-2002.