Danny Wayne Carruth v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 15, 2006
• Docket: 12-05-00236-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

                             NO. 12-05-00236-CR

                     IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

          TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

                                TYLER, TEXAS

DANNY WAYNE CARRUTH,                        '                 APPEAL FROM THE 241ST

APPELLANT

V.                                                                         '                 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE                                                       '                 SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

                                                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                 PER CURIAM

Following an open plea of Aguilty@ to the trial court, Appellant Danny Wayne Carruth was convicted of the offense of delivery of a controlled substance - methamphetamine, sentenced to forty-five years of imprisonment, and assessed a $10,000.00 fine.^[1]  Appellant=s counsel has filed an Anders^[2] brief, stating that the record does not present any meritorious points for appeal.  Appellant has not filed a pro se brief.  We affirm.

Background

On June 16, 2005, Appellant entered an open plea of Aguilty@ to the felony offense of delivery of a controlled substance - methamphetamine.  The trial court found Appellant Aguilty@ of the offense, sentenced him to forty-five years of imprisonment, and assessed a $10,000.00 fine.  Appellant timely filed his notice of appeal on June 21.

Analysis Pursuant to Anders v. California      

Appellant=s counsel has filed a brief in compliance with Anders and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969), stating that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible error and that there is no error upon which an appeal can be predicated.  He further relates that he is well acquainted with the facts in this case.  In compliance with Anders, Gainous, and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), Appellant=s brief presents a chronological summation of the procedural history of the case and further states that Appellant=s counsel is unable to raise any arguable issues for appeal.  

After conducting an independent examination of the record, we conclude that there are no arguable grounds for appeal.  As required by Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), Appellant=s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw.  We carried the motion for consideration with the merits of the appeal.  Having done so and finding no reversible error, Appellant=s counsel=s motion for leave to withdraw is granted and the trial court=s judgment is affirmed.

Opinion delivered February 15, 2006.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and DeVasto, J.

                                                            (DO NOT PUBLISH)

---

^[1]  Appellant made the open plea of Aguilty@ without a plea bargain agreement from the State and with the full knowledge that he would not be able to withdraw his plea if he did not agree with the trial court=s sentence.

^[2]  See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, 498 (1967).