### In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

______________________________

No. 06

- 1 0

- 00 152

- CR

______________________________

RANDI DENISE BRAY , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Cass County, Texas

Trial Court No. CCLM100048

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley2 MEMORANDUM OPINION

Randi Denise Bray appeals her conviction of guilt for the offense of driving while

intoxicated, a c lass B misdemeanor. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 49.04 (Vernon 2003). Bray

was sentenced to 180 days’ confinement in the county jail and was fined $2,000 .00

. Bray was

represented by different appointed counsel at trial and on appeal. 1

Bray’s attorney on appeal has filed a brief which discusses the record and reviews the

proceedings in detail. Counsel has thus provided a professional evaluation of the record

demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. This meets the

requir ements of Anders v. California , 360 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503

(Tex. Crim. App. 1981); and High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).

Counsel mailed a copy of the brief to Bray on February 1, 2011, informing Bray of her

right to file a pro se response and of her right to review the record. Counsel has also filed a

motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. Bray has n either filed a pro

se response, nor has she requested a n extension of time in which to file such a response.

We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently

reviewed the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we agree that no arguable issues support

an appeal. See Ble dsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

1 Bray also appeal ed , in companion cause number 06

- 10

- 00 151

- CR, opinion issued on March 22, 2011 , her conviction

of guilt for the offense of evading arrest in a motor vehicle and resulting sentence of two years in the state

- jail division

of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Both sentences are to run concurrently.3

In a frivolous appeal situation, we are to determine whether the appeal is without merit and

is frivolous, and if so, the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders , 386 U.S. 738.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 2

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: April 1, 2011

Date Decided: April 4, 2011

Do Not Publish

2 Since we agree this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders , grant counsel’s request to

withdraw from f

urther representation of appellant in this case. No substitute counsel wi ll be appointed. Should

appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Co urt of Criminal Appeals, appellant must either retain

an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or appellant must file a pro se petition for discreti onary review.

Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last

timely motion for rehearing that was overruled by this Court. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.2. Any petition for

discretionary review must be filed with this Court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal

Appeals along with the rest of the filings in this case. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary

review should comply with the requirem ents of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 68.4.