Court Opinion

ID: 2870432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 03:17:03.17713+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:31:14.076504
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-04-00232-CR

Edwin Sanchez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 55,795, HONORABLE GORDON G. ADAMS, JUDGE PRESIDING

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

A jury found appellant Edwin Sanchez guilty of evading arrest in a motor vehicle and
assessed his punishment at two years in state jail and a $4000 fine.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 38.04
(West 2003).  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 he 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 judgment of conviction is affirmed.

				__________________________________________
				W. Kenneth Law, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed:   February 3, 2005
Do Not Publish