Court Opinion

ID: 2855150
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-04 18:36:53.407621+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:32:44.843321
License: Public Domain

COURT OF APPEALS
                                                 SECOND
DISTRICT OF TEXAS
                                                                FORT
WORTH
 
 
                                        NO.
2-08-353-CR
 
 
JORGE CABELLO ARENAS                                                    APPELLANT
 
                                                   V.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS                                                                STATE
 
                                              ------------
 
           FROM
THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
 
                                              ------------
 
                                MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]
 
                                              ------------
After
waiving a jury and entering an open plea of guilty, appellant Jorge Cabello
Arenas appeals his conviction and ten-year sentence for possession of less than
one gram of cocaine.  We affirm.   

Appellant=s
court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and
a brief in support of that motion.  In
the brief, counsel avers that, in her professional opinion, the appeal is
frivolous.  Counsel=s brief
and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California[2]
by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there
are no arguable grounds for relief.  We
gave appellant the opportunity to file a pro se brief, and he has filed
one.  The State has not filed a brief.
Once an
appellant=s court-appointed attorney files
a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills
the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an
independent examination of the record.[3]  Only then may we grant counsel=s motion
to withdraw.[4]

There is
no reporter=s record in this case.  We have carefully reviewed the clerk=s
record, counsel=s brief, and appellant=s pro se
brief.  We agree with counsel that this
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing 
 

in the record that might
arguably support the appeal.[5]  Accordingly, we grant counsel=s motion
to withdraw and affirm the trial court=s
judgment.  
 
PER
CURIAM
PANEL:  CAYCE, C.J.; WALKER and MCCOY, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
 
DELIVERED:  November 19, 2009

[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

[2]386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct.
1396 (1967).

[3]See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511
(Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922B23 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1995, no
pet.).

[4]See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82B83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351
(1988).

[5]See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827B28 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App.
2006).