Court Opinion

ID: 2860486
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 20:33:47.411872+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:19.317708
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-95-00318-CR

Christine Ann Cowden, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF BELL COUNTY

NO. 2C94-1617, HONORABLE JOHN BARINA, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

	A jury found appellant guilty of driving while intoxicated.  The county court at law
assessed punishment at incarceration for 365 days and a $1000 fine, but suspended imposition of
sentence and placed appellant on probation.

	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes 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);
Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553

(Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to
appellant, and appellant was advised of her 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.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.

	The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed:   January 10, 1996

Do Not Publish