Robert John Small, Jr. v. State ( 2012 )

NO. 07-12-0240-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
DECEMBER 17, 2012
_____________________________
MICHAEL EARL PEDDICORD,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_____________________________
FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;
NO. 22,774-C; HONORABLE ANA ESTEVEZ, PRESIDING
_____________________________
Memorandum Opinion
_____________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
Michael Earl Peddicord was convicted after an open guilty plea of burglary of a
habitation and sentenced to twenty-eight years confinement. That conviction was
enhanced by a prior felony conviction.
Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, together with an
Anders1 brief, wherein he certified that, after diligently searching the record, he
concluded that the appeal was without merit. Along with his brief, appellate counsel
1
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).
filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there was
no reversible error and of appellant’s right to file a response pro se. By letter dated
October 5, 2012, this court also notified appellant of his right to file his own brief or
response by November 5, 2012, if he wished to do so. To date, a response has not
been filed.
In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel
discussed potential areas for appeal which included the sufficiency of the evidence to
support the plea of guilty and the punishment assessed. However, he also explained
why the issues were without merit. Indeed, before guilt was adjudicated, the State had
presented ample testimony allowing the factfinder to conclude that appellant committed
the crime to which he pled guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
In addition, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of
appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any arguable error pursuant to Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). After doing so, we concur with
counsel’s conclusions.
Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
2