Court Opinion

ID: 2918776
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-10 23:46:33.681204+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:56:49.243984
License: Public Domain

Powell v. SOT

NUMBERS  13-99-071-CR and 13-99-076-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

GEMINA POWELL,        Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,       Appellee.
____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Justices Dorsey, Hinojosa, and Rodriguez
Opinion by Justice Hinojosa

 On January 25, 1999, appellant, Gemina Powell, pleaded guilty to the offenses of delivery of a controlled substance and
failure to appear. (1)  After insuring that appellant had been admonished of her rights, the trial court accepted appellant's plea
of guilty.  On January 26, 1999, the trial court conducted a punishment hearing and assessed appellant's punishment at
twelve years imprisonment for the delivery of a controlled substance and eight years imprisonment for the failure to appear. 
The trial court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.  We affirm.
 Appellant's counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The
brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), 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). 
Appellant's counsel states in the brief that he has informed appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and to file
a pro sebrief.  No such brief has been filed.
 Appellant's counsel also filed a motion to withdraw as appellant's counsel, which this Court granted on March 11, 1999.
 We have carefully reviewed the entire record and counsel's brief and agree that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without
merit.  We find nothing in the record which might arguably support this appeal.  Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of
the trial court.

FEDERICO G. HINOJOSA
Justice

Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this
the 27th day of May, 1999.
1.  Appellant agreed to have the two offenses tried together.