eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2011-12

James Wayne Reno v. State ( 2011 )


Menu:
 
  •                         COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00007-CR
JAMES WAYNE RENO                                                   APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS                                                      STATE
----------
FROM THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOOD COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
After Appellant James Wayne Reno entered a plea of guilty to the charge
of forgery and pleaded true to an enhancement paragraph, a jury assessed his
punishment at two years’ confinement.            The trial court sentenced him
accordingly.
Reno’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as
counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation
of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.
    386 U.S. 738
    ,
    87 S. Ct. 1396 
    (1967). We gave Reno an opportunity to file a pro se
brief. Reno responded with a letter stating that he wished this court would ―let
this case die.‖ The State did not file a brief in this case.
Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on
the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this
court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See
Stafford v. State,
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State,
    904 S.W.2d 920
    , 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may
we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio,
    488 U.S. 75
    , 82–
83,
    109 S. Ct. 346
    , 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in
the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State,
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State,
    206 S.W.3d 684
    , 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
2
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial
court’s judgment.
BILL MEIER
JUSTICE
PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: December 8, 2011
3