Bobby Roy Anspach v. State ( 2002 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-01-00622-CR
NO. 03-01-00623-CR
Bobby Roy Anspach, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NOS. 45,475 & 45,940, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING
In cause number 45,475, appellant Bobby Roy Anspach pleaded guilty to possessing
methamphetamine with intent to deliver, was adjudged guilty by the court, and was sentenced to twenty
years= imprisonment. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. ' 481.112 (West Supp. 2002). In cause
number 45,940, appellant pleaded guilty to failing to appear, was adjudged guilty by the court, and was
sentenced to ten years= imprisonment. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 38.10 (West 1994).
Appellant=s court-appointed attorney filed briefs concluding that the appeals are frivolous
and without merit. The briefs meet 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 briefs were delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate
records and to file pro se briefs. No pro se briefs have been filed.
We have reviewed the records and counsel=s briefs and agree that the appeals are frivolous
and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals. Counsel=s motions
to withdraw are granted.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.
__________________________________________
Jan P. Patterson, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Patterson and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed: May 31, 2002
Do Not Publish
2