Chance Justin Willis v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 17, 2007
• Docket: 14-06-00285-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 17, 2007

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 17, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00285-CR

CHANCE JUSTIN WILLIS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1014713

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of possession of a controlled substance.  The trial court deferred adjudicating guilt and placed appellant under community supervision for a term of four years.  Subsequently, the State moved to adjudicate guilt.  Appellant entered a plea of true in exchange for the State=s recommendation of a two-year sentence.  On February 16, 2006, the trial court found the allegation to be true and sentenced appellant to confinement for two years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a fine of $750.  Appellant filed a motion for new trial.  After a hearing, the trial court denied the motion.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes 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), 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, more than sixty days has elapsed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and 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 May 17, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Fowler, and Frost.

Do Not Publish C Tex.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