Court Opinion

ID: 9351653
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-03 12:08:27.169839+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:01:28.554581
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                     NO. 03-22-00256-CR

                             Joseph Alexander Burpee, Appellant

                                                v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee

                FROM THE 453RD DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY
         NO. CR-19-1173-E, THE HONORABLE SHERRI TIBBE, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant Joseph Alexander Burpee was charged with one count of the offense of

possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, and one count of the offense of

possession of a controlled substance, psilocin. See Tex. Health & Safety Code §§ 481.115(a),

(c), .116(a), (c). Appellant was found guilty by a jury of the charged offense and, for each count,

was sentenced to five years’ confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice—

Institutional Division, with the sentences to run concurrently. Appellant appeals the trial court’s

judgments of conviction.

               Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported

by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.        The brief meets the

requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record

demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);
Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio,

488 U.S. 75, 86-87 (1988).

                Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he has provided copies of

the motion and brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record

and file a pro se brief; provided appellant with a complete copy of the appellate record; and

notified appellant of his deadline to file pro se brief, along with the mailing address of this Court.

See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S.

at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. To date, appellant has not filed a pro se brief.

                We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate

counsel’s brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d

at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with

counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal

is frivolous.

                Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.          The trial court’s judgments of

conviction are affirmed.

                                               __________________________________________
                                               Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Justices Baker, Kelly, and Smith

Affirmed

Filed: December 30, 2022

Do Not Publish

                                                  2