Milton Gonzalez v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 1, 2014
Docket13-13-00231-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Milton Gonzalez v. State (Milton Gonzalez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Milton Gonzalez v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-13-00231-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MILTON GONZALEZ, Appellant, v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 28th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

ORDER

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Perkes and Longoria Order Per Curiam Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed an Anders brief and a motion to

withdraw in this cause. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). On June

25, 2014, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued an opinion clarifying the

responsibilities owed by appellant’s counsel and the appellate court in Anders cases.

See Kelly v. State, PD-0702-13, 2014 WL 2865901, at **1–4 (Tex. Crim. App. June 25,

2014). In accordance with this opinion, appellant’s counsel must: (1) notify the appellant that counsel has filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw; (2) provide the

appellant with copies of both pleadings; (3) inform the appellant of appellant’s rights to

file a pro se response, review the record preparatory to filing that response, and seek

discretionary review if this Court concludes that the appeal is frivolous; and (4) provide

appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record, lacking only the

appellant’s signature and the date, and including the mailing address for the court of

appeals, with instructions to file the motion within ten days. See Anders, 386 U.S. at

744; Kelly, 2014 WL 2865901, at **3–4. Further, counsel must inform this Court, in

writing, that counsel has met the foregoing requirements. Kelly, 2014 WL 2865901, at

**3–4.

Accordingly, we ORDER appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel to comply

with the foregoing procedures and file, within ten days of the date of this order, a letter

certifying that appellant’s counsel has met the foregoing requirements in this case.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.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

Delivered and filed the 1st day of August, 2014.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Kelly, Sylvester
436 S.W.3d 313 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Milton Gonzalez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/milton-gonzalez-v-state-texapp-2014.