Court Opinion

ID: 2918861
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 00:09:51.34312+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:38:27.944120
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-00-230-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________

LEE MANUEL GOMEZ,	Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,	Appellee.

___________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 138th District Court
of Cameron County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N
Before Justices Yanez, Chavez, and Kennedy(1)
Opinion by Justice Kennedy
	Appellant was convicted upon his plea of guilty to the felony
offense of burglary of a habitation enhanced by one previous conviction. 
The appellate attorney herein has detailed the steps taken by the trial
court to assure that the plea was taken and the judgment and sentence
entered in accordance with the law.  She has concluded in her brief that
this appeal is wholly frivolous.  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. ­ Corpus
Christi 1995).

	Appellate counsel has also stated in her brief that she has mailed
a copy of her brief to appellant, together with a letter informing
appellant of his right to examine the appellate record for the purpose of
filing a pro se brief.  A copy of the letter is enclosed with the brief.  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
"frivolous appeal" brief.  The court stated: "Once 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."  We
have done this and we conclude that this appeal is wholly frivolous. 
We AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court.

	Appellate counsel has also filed a motion to withdraw as counsel
which is hereby granted.

								NOAH KENNEDY

								Retired Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 21st day of December, 2000.

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).