Court Opinion

ID: 2860220
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 20:29:13.639299+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:34:27.077844
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-96-00009-CR

Vander Wright, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 0952528, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

	This is an appeal from an order revoking community supervision.  The underlying
offense is possession of cocaine.  The punishment is incarceration in a state jail for two years.

	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes 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);
Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553

(Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).  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.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.

	The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

Before Justices Powers, Jones and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed:   May 8, 1996

Do Not Publish