Court Opinion

ID: 2862752
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 23:03:52.287494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:35:37.209700
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-00-00461-CR

Richard Nathaniel Robertson, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

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

NO. 50,697, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

The district court adjudged appellant Richard Nathaniel Robertson guilty of two
counts of robbery.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.02 (West 1994).  The court assessed
punishment for each count at imprisonment for twelve 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 judgments of conviction are affirmed.

				                                                                      

				J. Woodfin Jones, Justice

Before Justices Jones, Kidd and Yeakel

Affirmed

Filed:   September 21, 2000

Do Not Publish