in the Matter of C. J. P., a Juvenile

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 8, 2012
• Docket: 08-11-00183-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER OF C.J.P., A JUVENILE.

'

No. 08-11-00183-CV Appeal from the 65th Judicial District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC# 1000222)

                                                    MEMORANDUM OPINION

            On February 10, 2011, Appellant, a juvenile, entered a written stipulation wherein he admitted all of the allegations of delinquent conduct set forth in Count I (engaging in graffiti causing a loss less than $20,000) and Count II (theft over $50 but less than $500) of the State’s third-amended petition.  Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 51.03(a)(1) (West 2008).  The juvenile court conducted a disposition hearing on March 3, 2011.  The juvenile court thereafter entered an order of adjudication and placed Appellant on supervised juvenile probation until Appellant’s 18th birthday.  Appellant appeals from the juvenile court’s denial of Appellant’s motion for new trial.  We affirm.

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she has concluded 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, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); see also In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 298 (Tex. 1998)(Texas Supreme Court held that the Anders procedure applies to juvenile appeals and noted that, although juvenile-delinquency proceedings are classified as civil, their nature is quasi-criminal).  A copy of counsel’s brief has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.

The record reflects that Appellant executed in writing a waiver and consent in open court with the consent of Appellant’s attorney in accordance with Tex. Fam. Code Ann.  § 51.09, and Appellant made a judicial confession admitting his guilt.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.  A discussion of the contentions advanced in counsel’s brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

The judgment is affirmed.

                                                                        GUADALUPE RIVERA, Justice

February 8, 2012

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, J., and Antcliff, J.