Henry Columbus Bean, Jr. v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 11, 2006
• Docket: 07-05-00458-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NO. 07-05-0458-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

SEPTEMBER 11, 2006

______________________________

HENRY COLUMBUS BEAN, JR.,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 121^ST DISTRICT COURT OF TERRY COUNTY;

NO. 5166; HON. KELLY G. MOORE, PRESIDING _______________________________

Memorandum Opinion _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Henry Columbus Bean, Jr. appeals his conviction for possessing a controlled substance (cocaine) in an amount of less than one gram. He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to an enhanced punishment of twenty years confinement and a fine of $10,000. Appellant's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders ⁽¹⁾ brief in which he certified that, after diligently searching the record, he concluded that the appeal was without merit. Along with his brief, appellate counsel attached a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel's belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant's right to file a response or pro se brief. By letter dated July 24, 2006, this court also notified appellant of his right to tender his own brief or response and set August 23, 2006, as the deadline to do so. To date, no response has been filed.

In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel reviewed the various stages of the trial and discussed several potential areas for appeal. However, he adequately explained why each argument lacks merit. We have also conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel's conclusions and to uncover any error pursuant to Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.3d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Our own review has failed to reveal any reversible error.

Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

1. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

> Justice

1. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).