1 ... S ee Te x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OFAPPEA LS SE COND DIST RIC TOF TE XAS FORT WORTH NO. 2- 08 - 29 0- CR NO. 2 - 08 - 29 1- CR NO. 2 - 08 - 29 2- CR M CC L E NDO N MOODY AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 213TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppel l antM cC l endo n M ood y ent ered open pl eas of gui l ty t o t h ree of fens es — una ut hor i z ed us e o f a veh i cl e, burgl ar

y of a bui l di ng, an d pos se ss i on o f fo u r g ra m s o r m o re b u t l e s s th a n 2 0 0 g ra m s o f c o c a i n e w i th i n te n t to d e l i v e r, al ong w i t h a pl ea of t rue t o t he deadl y w ea pon a l l ega t i on on t he coc ai ne2 ... 3 8 6 U .S . 7 3 8 , 8 7 S . C t. 1 3 9 6 (1 9 6 7 ). 2 cha rge. He al so s i gne d j udi ci al co nfes si ons t o t he t hree of fens es asch arged . Th e t r i al courtaccept ed A ppel l ant ’ s p l eas and convi ct ed hi m of t he t hree o ffe n s e s . T h e tri a l c o u rt a l s o o rd e re d a p re s e n te n c e i n v e s ti g a ti o n re p o rt (P S I). A ft er j udi ci al l y no t i ci ng a nd revi ew i ng t he PSI an d he ar i ng t he t es t i m ony of A p p e l l a n t, h i s m o th e r, a n d h i s g i rl fri e n d o f e l e v e n y e a rs , th e tri a l c o u rt se nt enc ed A ppe l l antt o tw o y ea rs’ co nfi nem enti n a s t at e j ai l fac i l i ty for unau t hor i zed use of a vehi cl e a n d burgl ar y of a bui l di ng and fi ft een years’ c o n fin e m e n tin p r is o n fo r t h e p o s s e s s io n w it h in t e n tt o d e liv e r o f fe n s e , w it h a ll th e s e n te n c e s to ru n c o n c u rre n tl y . A p p e l l a n t’ s c o u rt -ap p o i n ted ap p e l l a te c o u n se l h a s f il e d a m o ti o n to w i t hdraw as counsel and a br i ef i n suppo rtof

t hatm ot i on. I n t he br i ef, counsel a v e rs th a t, i n h i s p ro fe s s i o n a l o p i n i o n , th e s e a p p e a l s a re fri v o l o u s . C o u n s e l ’s b ri e f a n d m o ti o n m e e t t h e req u i rem e n ts o f A n d e rs v . C a lifo r n ia 2 by pres ent i ng a p rofes si ona l ev al uat i on of the rec ords de m ons t rat i ng w hy t here a re n o a rg u a b le g ro u n d s fo r re lie f. A lt h o u g h A p p e lla n tw a s g iv e n a n o p p o rt u n ity t o file a p ro s e b r i ef, he ha s notdone s o. A ft er an appel l ant ’ s court - appo i nt ed coun sel fi l es a m ot i on t o w i t hdraw on t he ground t hatt he app ea l i s fr i vol ous an d ful fi l l s t he req ui rem ents of3 ... S e e S taffo rd v . S tate , 8 1 3 S .W .2 d 5 0 3 , 5 1 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 );

M ays v. Stat e, 904 S . W . 2d 920, 922– 23 (Tex. A pp. — FortW ort h 1995, no p e t.). 4 ... See Pe ns on v . O hi o, 488 U. S. 75, 82–83, 1 09 S . C t . 346, 351 (1 9 8 8 ).

5 ... Se e Bl e ds oe v . St a t e, 1 7 8 S . W . 3d 824, 827– 28 (Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 2 0 0 5 ). 3 A n d e rs , t hi s cou rti s obl i gat ed t o undert ak e an i nde pen den tex am i nat i on of t he rec ord. 3 O nl y t hen m ay w e grantcounsel ’ s m ot i on t o w i t hdraw . 4 W e have careful l y revi ew ed coun sel ’ s b ri ef and t he records. W e agree w i t h c ouns el t hatt hes e a ppe al s are w hol l y fr i vol ous and w i t hout m er i t ; w e fi nd n o t h in g e ls e in t h e re c o rd s t h a ta rg u a b ly m ig h ts u p p o rta n y a p p e a l. 5 A c c o rd i n g l y , w e g ra n t c o u n s e l ’s m o ti o n to w i th d ra w a n d a ffirm t h e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n ts . P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: DA U PH I N O T, M C C O Y, an d M EI ER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Se pt e m be r 17, 2009