Byron Lynn Lewallen v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 30, 2002
• Docket: 13-01-00336-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

                                   NUMBER 13-01-336-CR

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                       CORPUS CHRISTIBEDINBURG

BYRON LYNN LEWALLEN,                                           Appellant,

                                                   v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                       Appellee.

                       On appeal from the Criminal District Court

                                of Jefferson County, Texas.

                                   O P I N I O N

          Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Castillo

                                   Opinion by Justice Yañez

Appellant, Byron L. Lewallen, appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation.^[1]  We affirm.

Appellant pled guilty, without a plea agreement, to the felony offense of burglary of habitation and was found to be a repeat offender.  On April 3, 2001, the trial court found appellant guilty and assessed punishment at incarceration for eighteen years.

Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief stating that he has thoroughly reviewed the clerk=s record and the court reporter=s record in this case and found this appeal to present no meritorious issues.  See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).  Counsel has certified that he has given appellant a copy of his appellate brief and informed him of his right to examine the record and file a pro se response or brief.  No such brief has been filed.  Counsel has presented no points of error to this Court.

In Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988), the Supreme Court discussed the responsibilities of an appellate court upon receiving a Afrivolous appeal@ brief.  The court stated:  Aonce the appellate court receives this brief, it must then itself conduct >a full examination of all the proceeding[s] to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.= A  Id.  (quoting Anders, 386 U.S. at 744).  This we have done and we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.  We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

LINDA REYNA YAÑEZ

Justice

Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this the

30th day of August, 2002.

---

¹ Tex. Pen. Code Ann. ' 30.02(a)(3) (Vernon 1994).