## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 19

- 00204

- CR

SHANNA LEIGH CARPENTER, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 8th District Court Hopkins County, Texas Trial Court No. 1927105

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION
Shanna Leigh Carpenter entered an open plea of guilty to burglary of a habitation, a second

degree felony. See T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 30.02. After she pled true to the State’s punishment enhancement allegation, the trial court sentenced Carpenter to fift een years’ incarceration and ordered her to pay $15,000.00 in restitution

. Carpenter appeals. Carpenter ’ s attorney on appeal has filed a brief which states that s he has reviewed the record and has found no genuinely arguable issues that could be raised. The brief sets out the procedural history and summarizes the evidence elicited during the course of the trial proceeding. P rovid ing a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced , counsel has m et the requirements of Anders v. California

. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 743

– 44 (1967); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 509

– 10 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 812

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.

On December 5, 2019, counsel mailed to Carpenter a copy of the brief, the motion to

w ithdraw, and a mot ion for pro se access to the appellate record lacking only Carpenter’s signature. Carpenter was informed of h er right to review the record and file a pro se response

. By letter dated
December 6, this Court informed Carpenter that her pro se motion for a ccess to the record was due on or before December 23. On January 23, 2020, this Court notified Carpenter that any pro se response was due on or before February 24

. On March 2, this Court further informed Carpenter

that the case would be set for submissio n on the briefs on March 23. We received neither a pro se3 response from Carpenter nor a motion requesting an extension of time in which to file such a

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

the e ntire appellate record and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial court’s judgment. Id. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 1

Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice

D ate Submitted: March 23, 2020 Date Decided : March 24, 2020

Do Not Publish

1 Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders , grant counsel’s request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. S ee Anders , 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant desire to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, appellant must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from either the date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overrule d by this Court, s ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.3, and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see T EX

. R. A P P

. P. 68.4.