Ruben Simei Ornales v. State ( 2011 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-09-00729-CR
Ruben Simei Ornales, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILLS COUNTY, 35TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 2763, HONORABLE STEPHEN ELLIS, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Ruben Simei Ornales pleaded guilty and judicially confessed to possessing
more than four ounces of marihuana. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.121(a), (b)(3)
(West 2010). After hearing evidence, the trial court assessed punishment at two years in state jail.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements
of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the
record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State,
516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972);
Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s
brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See
Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State,
300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to withdraw
is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Henson and Goodwin
Affirmed
Filed: June 29, 2011
Do Not Publish
2