Court Opinion

ID: 2858648
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 19:17:12.904771+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:42.167578
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

AT AUSTIN

 

NO. 3-94-231-CR

JOSEPH LAROL EGLAN,

	APPELLANT

vs.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

	APPELLEE

 

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 43,888, HONORABLE STANTON B. PEMBERTON, JUDGE PRESIDING

 

PER CURIAM
	Appellant pleaded guilty and judicially confessed to the offense of aggravated
assault.  The district court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment at imprisonment for eight
years.
	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the
appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988);
Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553

(Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to
appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro
se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.
	We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.
	The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Justices Powers, Aboussie and B. A. Smith
Affirmed
Filed:   December 7, 1994
Do Not Publish