DocketNumber： 14-07-00875-CR
Filed Date： 7/31/2008
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 9/15/2015
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 31, 2008.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-07-00875-CR
____________
MAX HUBERT SCHAMP, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 174th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1114752
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of intoxication assault. On October 17, 2007, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for three years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.
Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than sixty days has elapsed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed July 31, 2008.
Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Brown.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).