Court Opinion

ID: 2920531
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 01:24:54.684762+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:55:27.838022
License: Public Domain

NUMBER
13-01-583-CR
 
                             COURT
OF APPEALS
 
                   THIRTEENTH
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 
                                CORPUS
CHRISTI
___________________________________________________________________
 
OTIS D. POULLARD, JR.,                                                      Appellant,
 
                                                   v.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                          Appellee.
___________________________________________________________________
 
                        On
appeal from the 252nd District Court
                                of
Jefferson County, Texas.
__________________________________________________________________
 
                                   O
P I N I O N
 
                    Before
Justices Dorsey, Yañez, and Kennedy[1]
                                 Opinion
by Justice Kennedy
 

Appellant=s court- appointed
attorney has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly
frivolous and without merit.  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. B Corpus Christi 1995,
no pet.).
Appellate counsel has included in his brief a statement certifying
that he has sent a copy of his brief and the reporter=s record to appellant
and has informed appellant by accompanying letter that it is the opinion of
counsel that the appeal is without merit, and that he (appellant) personally
has the right to view the record and file a pro se brief raising any
ground of error or complaint which he may desire.  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 Afrivolous appeal@ brief.  The court stated: AOnce 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.@  Id. at 80.  This we have done, and we conclude that the
appeal is wholly frivolous and that no error appears therein.  See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.
We AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court.
NOAH
KENNEDY
Justice
 
Do not
publish.
Tex.
R. App. P.
47.3.
 
Opinion delivered and
filed
this 18th day of
April, 2002.

 

[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).