Court Opinion

ID: 2861193
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 21:23:50.79971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:34:37.717716
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-98-00152-CR

Steve Hernandez Guevara, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 47,980, HONORABLE C. W. DUNCAN, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

After accepting appellant's guilty plea and judicial confession, the district court
found him guilty of possessing more than four ounces of marihuana.  Tex. Health & Safety Code
Ann. § 481.121 (West Supp. 1998).  The court assessed punishment at incarceration in a state jail
for one year.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding 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); High v. State,
573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App.
1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d
137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  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, Aboussie and Kidd

Affirmed

Filed:   October 22, 1998

Do Not Publish