Court Opinion

ID: 2876695
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 06:49:13.229396+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:35.170094
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                        NO. 03-08-00798-CR

                              Gordon Marcellous Jerome, Appellant

                                                  v.

                                   The State of Texas, Appellee

       FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
             NO. 63518, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING

                             MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Gordon Marcellous Jerome pleaded guilty to a charge of possession of a controlled

substance. He also pleaded true to an allegation of a prior felony offense. The trial court assessed

punishment at forty years in prison.

               Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief

concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (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, 80-81 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Appellant

received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

               Affirmed.

                                              G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop

Affirmed

Filed: May 29, 2009

Do Not Publish

                                                 2