Imari Obadele v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •  

    Opinion issued May 4, 2005  

      



     






          In The

    Court of Appeals

    For The  

    First District of Texas

    ____________


    NO. 01-04-01140-CR

    ____________


    IMARI OBADELE, Appellant  


    V.


    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee





    On Appeal from the 185th District Court

    Harris County, Texas

    Trial Court Cause No. 573865




     

    MEMORANDUM OPINION  

                   Appellant, Imari Obadele, pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance, and the trial court assessed punishment at 18 years’ confinement. Appellant subsequently filed a post-conviction motion for DNA testing. See TEX. CODE. CRIM. PROC. Arts. 64.01—64.05 (Vernon Supp. 2004) The trial court denied appellant’s motion. We affirm the order of the trial court that denied the appellant’s post-conviction motion for forensic DNA testing.

                   Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

                   Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is without merit.

                   We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

    PER CURIAM

    Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Bland.

    Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-04-01140-CR

Filed Date: 5/4/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/2/2015