Court Opinion

ID: 2920049
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 01:17:09.223584+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:05.709834
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
 13-01-703-CR
 
                             COURT
OF APPEALS
 
                   THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                                CORPUS
CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________
 
PATTY GAIL MONROE,                                                         Appellant,
 
                                                   v.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                          Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________
 
                        On
appeal from the 252nd District Court
                                of
Jefferson County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                                   O
P I N I O N
 
                  Before Justices Hinojosa, Castillo, and Kennedy[1]
                                 Opinion
by Justice Kennedy
 

Appellant=s court-appointed
attorney has filed a brief in which she has concluded that the appeal is wholly
frivolous and without merit.  Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 
The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a
professional evaluation of why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an
appeal.  See Stafford v. State,
813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Lindsey v. State, 902 S.W.2d 9,
11 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 1995,
no pet.).
Appellate counsel has included in her brief a statement certifying
that she has sent a copy of her brief and the reporter=s record to appellant
and has informed appellant by accompanying letter that it is the opinion of
counsel that the appeal is without merit, and that he (appellant) personally
has the right to view the record and file a pro se brief raising any
ground of error or complaint which he may desire.  No pro se brief has been filed.
In Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), the Supreme Court
discussed the responsibilities of an appellate court upon receiving a Afrivolous appeal@ brief.  The court stated: AOnce the appellate
court receives this brief, it must then, itself, conduct a full examination of
all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.@  Id. at 80.  This we have done, and we conclude that the
appeal is wholly frivolous and that no error appears therein.  See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.
In accordance with Anders, appellant=s attorney has asked
permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant.  See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744.  We grant the attorney=s motion to
withdraw.  We order appellant=s attorney to notify
appellant of the disposition of this appeal and of the availability of
discretionary review.  See Ex parte
Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).
We AFFIRM  the judgment of the
trial court.
NOAH
KENNEDY
Justice
Do not
publish.
Tex.
R. App. P.
47.3.
Opinion delivered and
filed
this 19th day of
December, 2002.

[1]Retired
Justice Noah Kennedy assigned to this Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of Texas pursuant to Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. '
74.003 (Vernon 1998).