Court Opinion

ID: 2869903
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 03:10:50.911877+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:44.342592
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                       NO. 03-04-00693-CR

                                 Michael E. Merritt, Appellant

                                                  v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee

      FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
            NO. 50107, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               In January 2000, appellant Michael E. Merritt pleaded guilty to possessing more than

one gram of cocaine. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115 (West 2003). He also

admitted having two previous felony convictions. The court deferred adjudication and placed Merritt

on community supervision. In September 2004, the court adjudicated Merritt guilty after a hearing

on the State’s motion and sentenced him to twenty-five years’ imprisonment.

               Merritt’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). Merritt received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

               The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

                                               ___________________________________________

                                               Bea Ann Smith, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Pemberton

Affirmed

Filed: June 16, 2005

Do Not Publish

                                                  2