Luis Cantu v. the State of Texas
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Date FiledAugust 28, 2026
Docket03-25-00533-CR
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-25-00533-CR
Luis Cantu, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY
NO. CR2017-007D, THE HONORABLE DIB WALDRIP, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found appellant Luis Cantu guilty of possession of methamphetamine, in an
amount of four grams or more but fewer than 200 grams, with intent to deliver. See Tex. Health
& Safety Code §§ 481.102(6), 112(a), (d). He pleaded true to three enhancement allegations, and
the trial court sentenced him as a habitual offender to forty years’ confinement. See Tex. Penal
Code § 12.42(d).
Cantu’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
brief concluding that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements
of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State,
300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988).
Cantu’s counsel has also certified to the Court that he sent copies of the motion and brief to Cantu;
informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response; and provided
him with a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–
20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. To date, no pro se response has
been received.
While executing an arrest warrant for Cantu at his mobile home in New Braunfels,
officers discovered a baggie containing a crystalline substance in a pocket of his pants. The
officers performed a protective sweep of the mobile home and observed a rifle case inside a closet.
During a subsequent search of the mobile home pursuant to a search warrant, they found items
indicative of the sale of drugs, including digital scales; a firearm holster; ammunition;
methamphetamine pipes; and baggies in multiple colors, some of which also contained a
crystalline substance. The substances in two of the colored baggies and in the baggie from Cantu’s
pocket tested positive for methamphetamine.
We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the record of
the trial below and appellate counsel’s brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at
744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review
and that the appeal is frivolous.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court’s judgment of conviction
is affirmed.
2
__________________________________________
Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice
Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Theofanis
Affirmed
Filed: August 28, 2026
Do Not Publish
3