Cirilo Gomez-Lagunas v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
• Decided: February 3, 2026
• Docket: 01-24-00250-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued February 3, 2025.

In the

Court of Appeals for the

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00250-CR ——————————— CIRILO GOMEZ-LAGUNAS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 488th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1749854

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court found appellant, Cirilo Gomez-Lagunas, guilty of the felony

offense of murder, see TEX. PENAL CODE § 19.02, and sentenced him to 35 years in

prison. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw,

along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal

is without merit and frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45

(1967).

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional

evaluation of the record and supplying the Court with references to the record and

legal authority. See id. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1978); Ndjock v. State, No. 01-23-00441-CR, 2024 WL 4701489 (Tex.

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 7, 2024, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for

publication). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and is

unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S.

at 744; Ndjock, 2024 WL 4701489, at *1; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Counsel has informed the Court that he provided appellant with a copy of his

Anders brief and motion to withdraw. Counsel also informed appellant of his right

to examine the appellate record and file a response to counsel’s Anders brief.

Further, counsel provided appellant with a copy of the appellate record and a form

motion to access the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App.

2008). Appellant has not filed a response to his counsel’s Anders brief.

2 We have independently reviewed the entire record, and we conclude that no

reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds for review, and

the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing reviewing

court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings,

whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2009) (stating that reviewing court must determine whether arguable

grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155-56 (same). Appellant may

challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for an appeal by filing a

petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Bledsoe,

178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

Conclusion

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant appellant’s appointed

counsel’s motion to withdraw.1 Attorney Andrew J. Williams must immediately

send appellant the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of

this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any other pending motions as

moot.

1 Appellant’s counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of the appeal and that appellant may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Ndjock v. State, No. 01-23-00441-CR, 2024 WL 4701489, at *1 n.3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 7, 2024, pet. ref’d).

3 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Caughey, and Dokupil.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).