Yunior Reyes Arias v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
• Decided: April 7, 2026
• Docket: 01-23-00632-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued April 7, 2026

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00632-CR ——————————— YUNIOR REYES ARIAS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 253rd District Court Chambers County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 19DCR0034

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant, Yunior Reyes Arias, guilty of the felony offense of

unlawful interception of an electronic communication. See TEX. PENAL CODE

§ 16.02. The jury assessed punishment at six years’ confinement and a $10,000 fine.

Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along

with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and 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. See 386 U.S. 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 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 (emphasizing that reviewing

court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether

appeal is wholly frivolous); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review

exist). We note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable

grounds for 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.

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

withdraw. Attorney Dan P. Bradley 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). Among other requirements, the notice must inform the 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).

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Gunn and Morgan.

Do not publish.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