Narrative Opinion Summary
The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin, affirmed the conviction of Freddie Rodriguez for aggravated assault, with a sentence of six years in prison and a $300 fine. Rodriguez's court-appointed attorney filed an Anders brief, concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit, providing a professional evaluation of the record to support this assertion. The court noted that a copy of the brief was provided to Rodriguez, who was informed of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; however, no such brief was submitted. After reviewing the record and the attorney's brief, the court agreed that the appeal lacked merit and found no arguable grounds to support it. The judgment of conviction was thus affirmed. The decision was filed on May 1, 1996, and was marked "Do Not Publish."
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Convictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Texas Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of the defendant after determining that the appeal lacks merit.
Reasoning: The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin, affirmed the conviction of Freddie Rodriguez for aggravated assault, with a sentence of six years in prison and a $300 fine.
Anders Brief Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court-appointed attorney filed an Anders brief, asserting that the appeal is frivolous and without merit, and the court agreed after reviewing the record.
Reasoning: Rodriguez's court-appointed attorney filed an Anders brief, concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit, providing a professional evaluation of the record to support this assertion.
Review of Appellate Recordsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reviewed the appellate record and the attorney's brief, finding no arguable grounds to support the appeal.
Reasoning: After reviewing the record and the attorney's brief, the court agreed that the appeal lacked merit and found no arguable grounds to support it.
Right to File Pro Se Briefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The defendant was informed of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief but did not submit one.
Reasoning: The court noted that a copy of the brief was provided to Rodriguez, who was informed of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief; however, no such brief was submitted.