eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2004-12

Donzell Monte Wilford v. State ( 2004 )


Menu:

  • TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN





    NO. 03-04-00404-CR

    NO. 03-04-00405-CR

    Donzell Monte Wilford, Appellant


    v.



    The State of Texas, Appellee







    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH & 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

    NOS. 51213 & 55475, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

    M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N


    In October 2001, appellant Donzell Monte Wilford was placed on deferred adjudication supervision after he pleaded guilty to burglary of a habitation in cause number 51213. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02 (West 2003). In June 2004, appellant pleaded true to the violations alleged in the State's motion to adjudicate. He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to twelve years in prison. At the same proceeding, appellant pleaded guilty to evading arrest with a motor vehicle in cause number 55475. See id. § 38.04. He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to two years in prison.

    Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed briefs concluding that these 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). Copies of counsel's briefs were delivered to appellant, and he was advised of his right to examine the appellate records and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has 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 records that might arguably support the appeals. Counsel's motions to withdraw are granted.

    The judgments of conviction are affirmed.





    __________________________________________

    David Puryear, Justice

    Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Kidd and Puryear

    Affirmed

    Filed: December 16, 2004

    Do Not Publish