Andrews, Bartlett Lee v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 27, 2002
• Docket: 14-02-00478-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion filed November 27, 2002

Affirmed and Opinion filed November 27, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-00478-CR

BARTLETT LEE ANDREWS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 208th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 854,268

O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of burglary of a habitation with intent to commit theft, and he elected to have a jury assess punishment.  On May 9, 2002, the jury found both enhancement paragraphs in the indictment true, assessed punishment at confinement for sixty years, and the court sentenced appellant to confinement for sixty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed November 27, 2002.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Hudson and Fowler.

Do not publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).