Rachel Gonzales v. State of Texas
This text of Rachel Gonzales v. State of Texas (Rachel Gonzales v. State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
Opinion filed January 14, 2010
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals ____________
No. 11-09-00069-CR __________
RACHEL GONZALES, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 35th District Court
Brown County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CR19045
MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court convicted Rachel Gonzales, upon her plea of no contest, of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. A plea bargain agreement was not entered. The trial court assessed her punishment at confinement for fifteen years. We dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of her right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005, no pet.). Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX . R. APP . P. 66. Black v. State, 217 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2007, no pet.). The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.
PER CURIAM
January 14, 2010 Do not publish. See TEX . R. APP . P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Strange, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rachel Gonzales v. State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rachel-gonzales-v-state-of-texas-texapp-2010.