Carlos Manuel Rivera v. State

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed August 27, 2018

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00053-CR No. 05-18-00054-CR No. 05-18-00055-CR No. 05-18-00056-CR CARLOS MANUEL RIVERA, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F17-45821-X, F17-45822-X, F17-45823-X, F17-45824-X

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Fillmore, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Whitehill Appellant Carlos Manuel Rivera waived a jury trial and pleaded guilty to manufacture and

delivery of methamphetamine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams,

unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (UPFF), and two forgery of a government instrument

offenses. Appellant also pleaded true to two enhancement paragraphs in the drug case and one

enhancement paragraph in the other three cases. After finding appellant guilty and the

enhancement paragraphs true, the trial court sentenced appellant to twenty-five years’

imprisonment in the drug case and five years’ imprisonment in the UPFF and forgery cases.

On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are 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 appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response,

but he did not file a pro se 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 brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the

appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support

the appeals.

We affirm the trial court’s judgments.

/Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 180053F.U05

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

CARLOS MANUEL RIVERA, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-00053-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F17-45821-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Fillmore participating.

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

Judgment entered August 27, 2018.

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

CARLOS MANUEL RIVERA, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-00054-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F17-45822-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Fillmore participating.

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

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

CARLOS MANUEL RIVERA, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-00055-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F17-45823-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Fillmore participating.

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

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

CARLOS MANUEL RIVERA, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 6, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-18-00056-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F17-45824-X. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Fillmore participating.

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

–6–