Court Opinion

ID: 2871420
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 03:58:59.368254+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:15.952845
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

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N
 
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Do Not Publish