Court Opinion

ID: 2917064
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-10 21:17:26.21714+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:38:19.407807
License: Public Domain

NO.
12-05-00215-CR
 
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 
 
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
 
TYLER, TEXAS
CASEY COOPER,    §                      APPEAL FROM THE 241ST
APPELLANT
 
V.        §                      JUDICIAL
DISTRICT COURT OF
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
APPELLEE   §                      SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
                                                                                                                                                           

MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
            Casey Cooper
appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery, for which he was sentenced to
imprisonment for thirty years.  Appellant’s
counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967) and Gainous v.
State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  We affirm.
 
Background
            Appellant
was charged by indictment with aggravated robbery.  The charge contained an allegation that
Appellant used or exhibited a deadly weapon during or during commission of or
the immediate flight from the offense. 
Appellant pleaded guilty as charged, and a trial on punishment was
conducted.  Ultimately, the jury assessed
Appellant’s punishment at imprisonment for thirty years.  The trial court sentenced Appellant
accordingly, and this appeal followed.
 
Analysis
Pursuant to Anders v. California
            Appellant’s
counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California ,
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967) and Gainous v.
State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant’s counsel
states that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and is of the
opinion that the record reflects no reversible error and that there is no error
upon which an appeal can be predicated. 
He further relates that he is well acquainted with the facts in this
case.  In compliance with Anders,
Gainous, and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1978), Appellant’s brief presents a chronological summation of the
procedural history of the case and further states that Appellant’s counsel is
unable to raise any arguable issues for appeal.1  We have likewise reviewed the record for
reversible error and have found none.
 
Conclusion
            As
required by Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991), Appellant’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw.  We carried the motion for consideration with
our consideration of this matter.  Having
done so and finding no reversible error, Appellant’s counsel’s motion for leave
to withdraw is hereby granted and the trial court’s
judgment is affirmed.
 
Opinion
delivered March 22, 2006.
Panel
consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and DeVasto, J.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(DO NOT PUBLISH)

1
Counsel for Appellant certified in his motion to withdraw that he provided
Appellant with a copy of this brief and that Appellant was given time to file
his own brief in this cause.  The time
for filing such a brief has expired and we have received no pro se brief.