Court Opinion

ID: 2859484
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 19:53:44.889955+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:08.511077
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-95-00153-CR

Adrian Hardeman, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. 428164, HONORABLE DAVID CRAIN, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

	The county court at law found appellant guilty of assault and assessed punishment
at incarceration for one hundred days.  Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01 (West 1994).  
	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 Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Jones
Affirmed
Filed:   June 21, 1995
Do Not Publish