Pedro Romero v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided November 14, 2007·No. 04-07-00324-CR·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION



No. 04-07-00324-CR


Pedro ROMERO,
Appellant


v.


The STATE of Texas,
Appellee


From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2005-CR-5516
Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding


Opinion by: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice



Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice



Delivered and Filed: November 14, 2007



AFFIRMED

Pedro Romero pled true to violating a condition of his community supervision in response to the State's motion to revoke community supervision. Romero appeals from the revocation of his community supervision. Romero's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which she concludes that the appeal is without merit. A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to Romero, who was advised of his right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (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.). Romero did not file a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's Anders brief. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellate counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.



Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

DO NOT PUBLISH



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

Pedro Romero v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Pedro Romero v. State (Pedro Romero v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Bruns v. State
924 S.W.2d 176 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Nichols v. State
954 S.W.2d 83 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)