Gardner, Louis v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:
  • Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005

    Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005.

     

    In The

     

    Fourteenth Court of Appeals

    ____________

     

    NO. 14-04-00236-CR

    ____________

     

    LOUIS GARDNER, Appellant

     

    V.

     

    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

     

      

     

    On Appeal from the 212th District Court

    Galveston County, Texas

    Trial Court Cause No. 01CR0390

     

      

     

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


    Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of delivery of a controlled substance, namely cocaine. In accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court placed appellant on five years of community supervision. The State subsequently moved to revoke the community supervision.  Appellant pled true to the stipulations of evidence.  On February 13, 2004, the trial court signed a judgment, sentencing appellant to confinement for two years in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.[1]  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

    Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

    A copy of counsel=s brief was 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, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

    We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

    Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

     

    PER CURIAM

     

    Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005.

    Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Hudson, and Frost. 

    Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).



    [1]  The judgment indicates that sentence was imposed on December 16, 2003.

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-04-00236-CR

Filed Date: 2/10/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/15/2015