Court Opinion

ID: 2871421
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 03:59:00.043631+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:16.003171
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                         NO. 03-05-00809-CR

                                   Ex parte John Michael Port

     FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 390TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
      NO. GV504316, HONORABLE CHARLES F. CAMPBELL, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

                             MEMORANDUM OPINION

               John Michael Port petitioned for writ of habeas corpus to contest his extradition to

Michigan. The writ issued and relief was denied. This appeal followed.

               Port’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). Port also filed a pro se brief.

               We have reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the pro se brief. We find nothing

in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27

(Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
              The order denying habeas corpus relief is affirmed.

                                           ____________________________________________

                                           Bea Ann Smith, Justice

Before Justices B. A. Smith, Puryear and Waldrop

Affirmed

Filed: June 30, 2006

Do Not Publish

                                               2