Cheryl Ann Fultz v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 13, 2005
• Docket: 01-04-00476-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued January 13, 2005

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-04-00476-CR

CHERYL ANN FULTZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from County Criminal Court at Law No. 12

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1219991

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Cheryl Ann Fultz, pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated with a plea bargain agreement of jail confinement for 180 days, suspended, and placement on community supervision for one year. The trial court sentenced appellant in accordance with the agreement and gave its permission for an appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant filed timely notice of appeal.

               On October 7, 2004, appellant’s retained counsel, Victor Blaine, filed a motion to withdraw as counsel, having concluded the appeal was meritless. We granted the motion on October 21, 2004. See McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 108 S. Ct. 1895 (1988). We further notified appellant in our October 21, 2004 order, as follows:

We notify appellant at her last known address, as provided in counsel’s motion, that her brief is due in this Court no later than November 20, 2004. Unless appellant retains counsel who files a brief on or before November 20, 2004, or unless by that date a motion for extension of time to file the brief is filed in this Court and granted, this appeal will be set for submission and considered by the Court without briefs on the record alone.

We received no response to our October 21, 2004 order.

               Therefore, on December 8, 2004, we set the appeal for submission on December 29, 2004 and notified the parties, as required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 39.9. Again, we received no response.

               Accordingly, we consider the appeal without briefs. We have reviewed the record for fundamental error and find none. See Ashcraft v. State, 802 S.W.2d 905, 906 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1991, no pet.); Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708, 708-09 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.).

               We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Hanks, and Higley.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).