Court Opinion

ID: 2928125
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-12 01:00:46.785753+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:39:27.075737
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002

Affirmed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002.
 
In The
 
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
 
NO. 14-01-01013-CR
____________
 
EDWARD LEE WASHINGTON, II, Appellant
 
V.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
 

 
On
Appeal from the 262nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial
Court Cause No. 865,081
 

 
M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N
After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of
possession of a controlled substance.  On
August 28, 2001, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 30
years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice
of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he
concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18
L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to
appellant.  Appellant was advised of the
right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1991).  As of this date, no pro se
response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. 
Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing
to the jurisprudence of the state.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
 
PER CURIAM
 
Judgment rendered and Opinion
filed May 30, 2002.
Panel consists of Justices Yates, Seymore, and Guzman.
Do not publish C Tex. R.
App. P. 47.3(b).