eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2002-01

Ramiro Mata v. State ( 2002 )


Menu:
 
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-01-00422-CR
Ramiro Mata, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 002192, HONORABLE FRANK W. BRYAN JR., JUDGE PRESIDING
At a bench trial, appellant Ramiro Mata was found guilty of possessing more than five
pounds of marihuana. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.121(a), (b)(4) (West Supp. 2002).
The court sentenced appellant to imprisonment for ten years.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
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 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). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right
to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Lee Yeakel, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Yeakel and Patterson
Affirmed
Filed: January 17, 2002
Do Not Publish
2