The i ndi ctmentsh ow s a ppel lan t’ s n ame as Dan iel Vi ll a. Dur ing a pretr ial hear ing 1 app ellantinforme d the court his true na me is D ann y Villa and th e trial judge state d the sty le of t he cas e w oul d be in the c or re cte d name. See Tex . C ode C ri m. Proc. Ann. ar t. 26.08 (V er non 198 9)
. NO. 07-06 -027 0-CR IN THE CO UR T OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL A JU LY19, 2007

_________

_________

_________

___ DANNY VILL A, APP ELL ANT V. THE S TATE OF TEXAS, APPEL LEE

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 13 7 DIS T RI CT COU RT OF L UB BO CKCOU NT Y; TH NO . 200 6- 412699; H ON ORABLE CE CI L G. PU RY EAR , J UD GE

_________

_________

_________

____ Before CAMPBE LL, HANCOCK and PIRT LE, JJ. ON A BA TEMENT A ND R EMA ND App ellantDanny Vill a app eals his convictions for the felon y of fense of driv ing w hile 1 int ox ic ated and pun is hment , e n h a n c ed by tw o pr ior felony co nv icti ons, at li fe impr is onment. W e ab ate and rema nd th is cause to the trial court for app ointm entof new coun sel.2

Appel lan t' s c ounse l has filed a mot ion to w it hdraw and a br ief i n s uppor t pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U .S. 738, 87 S. Ct . 139 6, 18 L.E d.2d 493 ( 1967) , i n w hic h s he re present s s he has se ar ched the re co rd and, i n her professi onal opi nio n, un der the cont ro ll ing auth or it ies and facts of the c ase there is no rev ersi ble er ro r or l eg it imat e g ro unds for appe al. C ounse l has infor med appell ant b y l etter of his r ig ht t o rev iew

the tr ial re cord and to fil e a pro se respon se. Johns on v . St ate , 885 S.W .2d 6 41, 6 45 (Te x .Ap p.– W a c o 19 94, pet. ref'd). By letter this cou rt also not if ied ap pellan t of his opportunity

to submi t a re spons e to the And ers brief and mot ion to w ithdra w f iled by his couns el. Ap pel lan t has fil ed a pro se respon se ra is ing four is sues he b eli ev es show the app eal ha s merit. T he St ate has f iled a brief add re s s in g the issues in app ellant ’s re spons e. Havi ng rev iew ed the record and atte mp ted to address the ma tters discusse d in app ointe d cou nsel’s Anders b rief , app ellant ’s pro se re spons e and the Stat e’s br ief, w e find tha t w e cann ot do so w ithou t add ressing th e me rits of t hose m atte rs. Accordin gly , w e mu st conc lud e that arg uabl e grounds for appeal ex is t. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W .3d 8 24, 826- 27 ( Tex .C ri m.App. 2005) ( dis cus si ng ch oic es av ail abl e to cour t of appeal s faced w it h Anders br ief and pro se respon se)
. T o ensu re app ellant ’s rig ht to coun sel, w e grant app ellant ’s prese n tco unse l’s moti on to w it hdraw , aba te t he appe al, and re mand the ca use to t he tr ial co urt for appoi ntment of n ew

co unsel
. See B led

soe, 178 S. W .3d a t 827 ; Staf for d v . St ate , 813 S.W .2d 5 03, 5 11 ( Tex .C ri m.App. 1991)
. W e di re ct the tr ial cour t t o appoi nt ne w

co unsel3

to repre sentapp ellanton ap pea l. The trial court s h a ll f urnish th e na me , add ress, tele p h o ne n um ber, an d stat e ba r num ber of new coun sel to the clerk of this court im m e d ia t e ly a f

t e r t h e a p p o in t m e n ti s o rd e re d
. A p p e ll a n t ’s b ri e f s h a ll b e d u e fo rt y-f ive d a ys from the date of t he tr ial cour t’ s appoi ntment of ne w couns el. Al l other appel lat e deadl ine s shal l be i n ac cord w it h the Tex as Rul es of Appel lat e Procedu re . It is so ordered. Per C ur iam

Do not p ubl is h.