Francisco Medina-Rubio v. State
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-11-00255-CR
Francisco MEDINA-RUBIO, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas Trial Court No. 10-05-0131-CRA Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: February 15, 2012
MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
Francisco Medina-Rubio was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with a deadly
weapon and aggravated kidnapping. The trial court sentenced Medina-Rubio to twenty years’
confinement and seventy years’ confinement, respectively, and ordered the terms to run
concurrently. Medina-Rubio timely appealed the judgments.
Medina-Rubio’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief
in which he raises no arguable points of error and concludes this appeal is frivolous and without 04-11-00255-CR
merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969). Counsel states Medina-Rubio was provided a copy of the brief and motion to
withdraw and was further informed of his right to review the record 1 and file his own brief.
Medina-Rubio has not filed a pro se brief.
After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with
counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Medina-Rubio’s counsel and
affirm the trial court’s judgments. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.–San
Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1996,
no pet.).
No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Medina-Rubio wish to seek further
review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to
file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any
petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days after either this opinion is
rendered or the last timely motion for rehearing or motion for en banc reconsideration is
overruled by this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be
filed with the clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for
discretionary review must comply with the requirements of rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Do not publish
1 Counsel is reminded that he should explain the procedure for obtaining the record from the trial court clerk. See Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.).
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Francisco Medina-Rubio v. State (Francisco Medina-Rubio v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.