Court Opinion

ID: 2864205
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 23:59:24.538954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:35:23.555477
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-00-00580-CR

Bradley Scott Hays, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

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

NO. 50,629, HONORABLE C. W. DUNCAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

A jury found appellant Bradley Scott Hays guilty of felony driving while
intoxicated.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 49.04(a), .09(b) (West Supp. 2001).  The district court
assessed punishment at imprisonment for ten years, but suspended imposition of sentence and
placed appellant on community supervision.

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 appellant
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.

				__________________________________________

				Lee Yeakel, Justice

Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Yeakel and Patterson

Affirmed

Filed:   April 12, 2001

Do Not Publish