Deontra Terrel Mason v. State ( 2011 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-10-00237-CR
______________________________
DEONTRA TERREL MASON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 336th Judicial District Court
Fannin County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR-10-23444
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Deontra Terrel Mason appeals from his conviction in a trial before the court for assault.
The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to one year in county jail.
Mason’s attorney on appeal has filed a brief which discusses the record and reviews the
proceedings in detail. Counsel has thus provided a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. This meets the
requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503
(Tex. Crim. App. 1981); and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).
Counsel mailed a copy of the brief and a letter to Mason on June 29, 2011, informing
Mason of his right to file a pro se response and of his right to review the record. No response has
been filed. Counsel has also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this
appeal.
We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently
reviewed the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and find no genuinely arguable issue. See
Halbert v. Michigan, 545 U.S. 605, 623 (2005). We, therefore, agree with counsel’s assessment
that no arguable issues support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2005).
2
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.1
Josh R. Morriss, III
Chief Justice
Date Submitted: September 12, 2011
Date Decided: September 13, 2011
Do Not Publish
1
Since we agree this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel’s request to
withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should
appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, appellant must either retain
an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or appellant must file a pro se petition for discretionary review.
Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last
timely motion for rehearing or for en banc reconsideration was overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2.
Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 68.3 (amended by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Misc. Docket No. 11-104, effective Sept. 1, 2011).
Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.
3