Court Opinion

ID: 2893270
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 22:40:05.968429+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:32:31.197817
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-06-0056-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

OCTOBER 16, 2006

______________________________

RODGER WAYNE MITCHELL,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 64
TH
 DISTRICT COURT OF CASTRO COUNTY;

NO. A3024-0506; HON. ROBERT W. KINKAID, JR., PRESIDING

_______________________________

Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Rodger Wayne Mitchell (appellant) appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation.  He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to twenty years confinement and a fine of $10,000.  Appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an 
Anders
(footnote: 1) brief, in which he certified that, after diligently searching the record, the appeal was without merit.  Appellant filed a response on August 4, 2006.

In compliance with the principles enunciated in 
Anders, 
appellate counsel reviewed the various stages of the trial and discussed several potential areas for appeal.  However, he adequately explained why each argument lacks merit.  We have also conducted our own review of the record and appellant’s response to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any error pursuant to 
Stafford v. State, 
813 S.W.3d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  Our own review has failed to reveal any reversible error.  

Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

Brian Quinn 

          Chief Justice

Do not publish.

 

FOOTNOTES
1:Anders v. California, 
386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).