### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 08 -0 02 28 -C R

______________________________ CL YDE WASHI

NGTON , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appea l from the County Court at L aw Bow ie County , Texas Tr ia l Co ur

t N o. 08 M1 06 2- CCL

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C

. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by J ustice MoseleyWas hin g ton a pp e a ls f ro m f our s e pa rate c on vic tio ns of

ha ra ssm e nt i n c ompanion

a pp e a ls, 1 cause numbers 06-08-00228- CR, 06-08- 00229-CR, 06- 00230-CR, a nd 06-00231-CR, i n wh ich opinions are relea sed t his date. He was sente nced in e ach c ase to 120 da y s' confine ment, with the sentenc es to run conc urre ntly and fine s of $2,000.00.

2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Cly de Washington appea ls f rom his conviction by

a jury of the off ense of hara ssment. See T EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § 42 .07 (Vern on 20 03 ). Th e jur y a sse sse d h is p un ish me nt a t 12 0 d ay s' confine ment and a fine of $2,000.00. Washington was repr esente d by the publ ic def ender ' s office 1 at trial and by

appointed counse l on appea l. Washington' s attorney has filed a

brief in whic h she conclude s that the appe al is frivolous and without merit, afte r a revie w of the record a nd the re lated law. Counsel state s th a t s h e h a s s tu d ie d th e r e c o r d

an d f in d s n o e r r o r p r e s e r v e d f o r a p p e a l t hat could be suc cessf

ully argued. The brief c ontains a prof essional evaluation of the rec ord and advanc es two arguable g rounds for revie w. This me ets the require ments ofAn de rs v. Cal ifo rn ia , 386 U. S. 7 38 (1 96 7) ; Sta

ffo rd v . S tate , 813 S.W .2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); and Hi gh v . S tate , 573 S.W .2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [ Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel mailed a copy

of the brie f to Washington on April 2, 2009, informing Washington of his rig ht to ex amine the e ntire appe llate re cor d an d t o fi l e a pro se response . Counsel simult aneously filed a motion with this C ourt seekingto withdraw a s counsel in this appea l, and reque sting a

n extens i o n o f t i m e for

Washington to file his pro se r esponse. That ext ension was g rante d by

this Court unt il May

28, 2009. Counsel also notified t h i s Court in that moti on that3

Washington had not ke pt her off ice infor med of his wher eabouts since his relea se fr om custody and t h a ts h e w a s u n c e rt a i na s t o w h e t h e r h e h a d r e c e i v e d t h e l e t t e r an d b r i e f

s h e h a d m a i l e d t o h i m . If

a cr iminal defenda

nt fails to keep his attorne y informed of

his curre nt addre ss, he forfeits the rig ht to rec eive a

copy of the A n d

e rs brief a

nd the rig ht to file a pro se response . In re Sc hulman , 252 S.W .3d 403 (Tex. C ri m . Ap p . 2008). Washington ha s not filed a re sponse or a reque st for an extension of tim e in which to file suc h a re sponse. We have de termined that this appea l is wholly frivolous. We have inde pendently revie wed the c le rk ' s r e c or d a

nd the re po rt e r' s r e c or d, and we a g re e that no argua

ble iss ue s su

pp or t an a pp e a l. Se e Bl e ds oev . S

tate , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. C ri m . App. 2005). In a fr ivolous appeal situation, we are to determine whether the appe al is withou t m er i t an d i s frivolous, and if so, the appea l must be dismi ssed or a ffirme d. Se e An de rs , 386 U.S. 738.Since we ag ree this c ase prese nts no reve rsible err or, we also, in a ccor dance with An de rs , 2 g rant c ounsel' s reque st to withdraw from f urther r epre sentation of Washi n gt o n in this case. No su bs tit ute c ouns e l w ill be a

pp ointe d. Sho uld

Was hin g ton

wi shto s e e k f

ur the r r e vie w o f t

his c a se by the Texas Court of Criminal Appea ls, Washington m ust either retain an attorney to file a pe tition for discr etionary

revie w, or Washing ton must file a pro se pe titi o n fo r discre tionary revie w. Any petition for discre tionary

revie w must be filed within thirty day s from the date of e ither this opinion or the la st t ime ly

mot ion fo r r e he ari ngthat w a s o ve rr ule d b y thi s Co ur t. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 68.2. Any petition for discre tionary revie w must be filed with this Court, afte r which it will be for war ded to the Texas Court of C riminal Appea ls alongwith the rest of the filings in this case

. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P

. 68 .3 . A ny

pe tit ion fo r d isc re tio na

ry re vie w s ho uld

c omp ly wi th t he re qu ir e me nts of

Rul e 68.4 of the Te x as Rules of Appe llate Proce dure. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 68.4. 4 We a ff ir m th e jud g me nt o f t

he tr ia l c ourt . 2

Ba iley C. Moseley J ustice Date Submitted: J uly 2, 2009 Date D ecide d: J uly 3, 2009 Do No t Pu

bli sh