Court Opinion

ID: 2865999
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 01:02:22.169258+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:40:37.846063
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-01-00422-CR

Ramiro Mata, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 002192, HONORABLE FRANK W. BRYAN JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

At a bench trial, appellant Ramiro Mata was found guilty of possessing more than five
pounds of marihuana.  See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.121(a), (b)(4) (West Supp. 2002). 
The court sentenced appellant to imprisonment for ten years.

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 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.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

				__________________________________________
				Lee Yeakel, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Yeakel and Patterson
Affirmed
Filed:   January 17, 2002
Do Not Publish