Court Opinion

ID: 2859719
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 19:57:50.065111+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:23:01.407246
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-94-00491-CR

Hubbard Lloyd Harris, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR93-0197-B, HONORABLE BARBARA WALTHER, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

	A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated robbery and assessed punishment at
imprisonment for thirty years and a $10,000 fine.  Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03 (West 1994). (1)
	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 his 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 Justices Powers, Kidd and B. A. Smith
Affirmed
Filed:   March 1, 1995
Do Not Publish
1.        After this offense was committed, section 29.03 was amended in a nonsubstantive way.