Court Opinion

ID: 2854478
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-04 17:20:47.535121+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:34:05.124487
License: Public Domain

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 2-06-405-CR

SHEILA LANETTE CALHOUN	APPELLANT

A/K/A SHEILA L. CALHOUN

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

------------

FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION
(footnote: 1)

------------

Appellant Sheila Lanette Calhoun pled guilty to theft of property valued under $1500 with two prior theft convictions.  The jury found her guilty, found that she had used or exhibited a deadly weapon during the offense, and assessed her punishment at ten years’ confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  The trial court sentenced her accordingly.

Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  In the brief, counsel avers that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of 
Anders v. California
(footnote: 2) by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  Although Appellant was given an opportunity to file a brief, she has not done so.

After an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of 
Anders
, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record.
(footnote: 3)  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
(footnote: 4)  Because Appellant entered an open plea of guilty, our independent review for potential error is limited to potential jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of her plea, error that is not independent of and supports the judgment of guilt, and error occurring after entry of the guilty plea.
(footnote: 5)
	We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief and the record.  We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that arguably might support the appeal.
(footnote: 6)  Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

PER CURIAM

PANEL F:  DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH	

Tex. R. App. P.
 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  March 6, 2008
 

FOOTNOTES
1:See
 
Tex. R. App. P.
 47.4.

2:386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).

3:See Stafford v. State
, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); 
Mays v. State,
 904 S.W.2d 920, 922-23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).

4:See Penson v. Ohio,
 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351, 52 (1988). 

5:See Monreal v. State,
 99 S.W.3d 615, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).

6:See Bledsoe v. State,
 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).