Harmon, Deshane v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Harmon, Deshane v. State

DecidedNovember 14, 2002

Docket14-02-00377-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Harmon, Deshane v. State (Harmon, Deshane v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harmon, Deshane v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion filed November 14, 2002

Affirmed and Opinion filed November 14, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-02-00376-CR

NO. 14-02-00377-CR

DESHANE HARMON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 179th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 879,396 & 883,804

O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the allegations in two indictments for aggravated robbery on October 31, 2001. After a pre-sentence investigation report, on March 19, 2002, the trial court sentenced appellant in each case to confinement for eight years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, with the sentences to run concurrently. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal in each case.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes that the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by 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, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that the appeals are 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 judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed November 14, 2002.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Brister and Justices Hudson and Fowler.

Do not publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI