Kalvin Fay v. State ( 2002 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-01-00545-CR
Kalvin Fay, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. B-01-0238-S, HONORABLE RAE LEIFESTE, JUDGE PRESIDING
Appellant Kalvin Fay pleaded guilty to robbery. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 29.02
(West 1994). Appellant also admitted a previous conviction alleged for enhancement of punishment,
and confessed that he was guilty of two pending unadjudicated felonies. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann.
§§ 12.42, .45 (West 1994 & Supp. 2002). The district court adjudged appellant guilty and sentenced
him to imprisonment for thirty-three years.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit. The brief meets 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 brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right
to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Jan P. Patterson, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Patterson and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed: April 4, 2002
Do Not Publish
2