Ventura Reyes Alvarado v. State
This text of Ventura Reyes Alvarado v. State (Ventura Reyes Alvarado 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.
Opinion
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas April 27, 2016
No. 04-15-00790-CR
Ventura Reyes ALVARADO, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2009CR9646 Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding
ORDER Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a brief and motion to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. Counsel certifies he has served copies of the brief and motion to withdraw to appellant, has informed appellant of his right to review the record and file his own brief, and has provided appellant with a copy of the clerk’s record and reporter’s record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
If appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we order that he do so on or before June 13, 2016. The State has filed a notice waiving its right to file a brief in this case unless appellant files a pro se brief. If appellant files a timely pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief no later than thirty days after appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court.
We further order the motion to withdraw filed by appellant’s counsel held in abeyance pending further order of the court. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80-82 (1988) (holding that motion to withdraw should not be ruled on before appellate court independently reviews record to determine whether counsel’s evaluation that appeal is frivolous is sound); Schulman v. State, 252 S.W.3d 403, 410–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (same); Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 319 (appointed counsel’s duties of representation do not cease when he files a motion to withdraw; counsel must continue to “act with competence, commitment and dedication to the interest of the client” until the court of appeals grants the motion). Accordingly, no new attorney will be appointed for appellant at this time. We further order the clerk of this court to serve a copy of this order on appellant, his counsel, the attorney for the State, and the clerk of the trial court.
_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 27th day of April, 2016.
___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ventura Reyes Alvarado v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ventura-reyes-alvarado-v-state-texapp-2016.