Buxton Jr., Frank v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 4, 2005
• Docket: 14-04-00675-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 4, 2005

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed August 4, 2005.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-04-00675-CR

FRANK BUXTON, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 228th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 975,581

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

After the trial court denied his motion to suppress, appellant entered a guilty plea to possession of a controlled substance, cocaine, weighing between one and four grams and true to two enhancement paragraphs.  The trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 25 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a written notice of appeal. 

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous, including review of the motion to suppress, and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), 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 no motion to review the record or pro se response has been filed.

We agree 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 Memorandum Opinion filed August 4, 2005.

Panel consists of Justices Edelman, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).