Jorge Rios Perez v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 12, 2022
• Docket: 01-21-00660-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued May 12, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-21-00660-CR ——————————— JORGE RIOS PEREZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1579123

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jorge Rios Perez, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of murder.

See TEX. PENAL CODE §§ 19.02(b)(1). The trial court then sentenced him to 80 years

in prison. See id. § 12.32. 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 that the appeal is

without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

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

evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal

authority. Id. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App.

1978). 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;

Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no

pet.).

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, 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, 87 S. Ct. at

1400 (emphasizing that 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) (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 (reviewing court

determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note

that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for

2 appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal

Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.1 Attorney Danny Easterling 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.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Countiss and Farris.

Do not publish.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

1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he 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). 3