Earl R. Beal, Jr. v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 15, 2007
• Docket: 14-06-00887-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 15, 2007

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 15, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00887-CR

EARL BEAL, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1016336

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 with intent to deliver a controlled substance.  On September 6, 2006, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 25 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he 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 March 15, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Hudson.

Do Not Publish C Tex.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