Vecentie Sontiago Morales v. the State of Texas

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 16, 2024

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00514-CR

VECENTIE SONTIAGO MORALES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 1
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1730004R

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals his conviction of two counts of the second-degree felony
offense of sexual assault, one count of the third-degree felony offense of
continuous violence against a family member; and one count of the third-degree
felony offense of assault on a family member by impeding breath or circulation.
See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.01(b)(2)(B), 22.011(a)(1)(A); 25.22(e).
Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the
record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). On November 13, 2023,
appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro
se response and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we
find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each
claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined
there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,
827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Zimmerer and Wilson.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

2