Carroll Dwayne Leblanc v. State ( 2012 )

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 14, 2012.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-12-00068-CR
____________
CARROLL DWAYNE LEBLANC, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 08-04633
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of burglary of a building and was
placed on deferred adjudication probation for five years. On January 9, 2012, the trial
court adjudicated appellant’s guilt and sentenced him to confinement for two years in the
State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely
notice of appeal.1
1
Appellant initially appealed to the Ninth Court of Appeals in Beaumont. Pursuant to its docket equalization
authority, the Texas Supreme Court transferred appellant’s appeal to this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001.
Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), 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 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
Copies of counsel’s brief and the record were 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). As of this date, more than
forty-five days has passed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s response,
and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. A discussion of the brief
would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. 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).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Seymore and Brown.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2