DocketNumber： 03-07-00508-CV
Filed Date： 7/31/2008
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 9/6/2015
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-07-00667-CR Martin Torres, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-DC-04-100229, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION 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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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. See Bledsoe v. State,178 S.W.3d 824
, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. ___________________________________________ Diane M. Henson, Justice Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Henson Affirmed Filed: July 31, 2008 Do Not Publish 2