Juan Guardiola v. State ( 2006 )

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 14, 2006

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 14, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

 NO. 14-06-00173-CR

 NO. 14-06-00174-CR

 NO. 14-06-00175-CR

 NO. 14-06-00176-CR

____________

JUAN GUARDIOLA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 1025962; 1024687; 1024688; & 1024689

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered pleas of guilty to the offenses of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, two counts of aggravated assault, and the offense of aggravated kidnapping.  On January 25, 2006, the trial court sentenced appellant as follows with sentences to run concurrently:  (1) in cause number 1025962 to- confinement for five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice; (2) in cause number 1024687 to- confinement for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice; (3) in cause number 1024688 to- confinement for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice; and (4) in cause number 1024689 to- confinement for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed notices of appeal in each cause.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised by letter dated May 30, 2006, of the right to examine the appellate records and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the records and counsel=s brief and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the records.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed September 14, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Hudson, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).