Court Opinion

ID: 2867272
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 01:47:21.641441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:33.630812
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-02-00257-CR

Charles Myles, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 1010906, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant Charles Myles pleaded guilty to possessing less than one gram of cocaine
in a drug-free zone.  Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 481.115(a), (b), .134(d) (West Supp. 2003). 
He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to ten years' imprisonment, but imposition of sentence was
suspended and he was placed on community supervision.  He now appeals from an order revoking
supervision and imposing sentence.
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 order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

  
				W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed:   March 20, 2003
Do Not Publish