Court Opinion

ID: 2864686
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 00:43:54.993725+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:37.469915
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-02-00413-CR

In re Lydia Foster Whiteley

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 51,226, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

Lydia Foster Whiteley fatally shot her common-law husband in the presence of two
witnesses.  She pleaded guilty to murder, was adjudged guilty by the court, and was sentenced to ten
years in prison.  She now appeals from an order by the district court refusing her request for
postconviction DNA testing.  See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 64.01-.05.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding 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); High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised
of her 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.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.  Counsel's
motion to withdraw is granted.
The district court's order is affirmed.

  
				Lee Yeakel, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Yeakel
Affirmed
Filed:   October 24, 2002
Do Not Publish