Jacob Adam Chavez v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 10, 2014
• Docket: 09-13-00465-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-13-00465-CR ____________________

JACOB ADAM CHAVEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 221st District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 12-09-09566 CR ________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION In this appeal, court-appointed appellate counsel, who represents Jacob

Adam Chavez, submitted a brief that contends no arguable grounds can be

advanced in Chavez’s appeal. The judgment from which Chavez appeals reflects

that he was convicted of aggravated robbery. Based on our review of the record,

we agree that no arguable issues exist to support Chavez’s appeal. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).

1 A jury found Chavez guilty of aggravated robbery, and following the

punishment phase of his trial, found that he should serve a life sentence and pay a

$10,000 fine. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03(a)(2) (West 2011). On appeal,

Chavez’s counsel filed a brief presenting counsel’s professional evaluation of the

record; in the brief, Chavez’s counsel concludes that Chavez’s appeal is frivolous.

See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.

1978). We granted an extension of time to allow Chavez to file a pro se brief.

Chavez filed a response.

After reviewing the appellate record, the Anders brief filed by Chavez’s

counsel, and Chavez’s pro se response, we agree with counsel’s conclusion that

any appeal would be frivolous. Consequently, we need not order the appointment

of new counsel to re-brief Chavez’s appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503,

511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

AFFIRMED.

________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice

Submitted on October 15, 2014 Opinion Delivered December 10, 2014 Do Not Publish Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

1 Chavez may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2