Mario Garcia v. State ( 2013 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
_________________
NO. 09-12-00228-CR
_________________
MARIO GARCIA, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 75th District Court
Liberty County, Texas
Trial Cause No. CR29258
________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Following a jury trial, appellant, Mario Garcia was convicted of burglary of a
habitation. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(1) (West 2011). After pleading true to
four enhancement paragraphs, Garcia was sentenced by the jury to confinement in the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice for a term of eighty years. This appeal followed.
Garcia’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional
evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 8071
(Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On August 16, 2012, we granted an extension of time for
appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Garcia.
We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion
that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order
appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813
S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1
AFFIRMED.
___________________________
CHARLES KREGER
Justice
Submitted on November 19, 2012
Opinion Delivered January 16, 2013
Do not publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
1
Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
2