in the Interest of M. C. S. a Child

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 21, 2005
• Docket: 07-04-00557-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

WINNIE PIPELINE V. HARRINGTON NO. 07-04-0557-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

MARCH 21, 2005

______________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF M. C. S., A CHILD _________________________________

FROM THE 108th DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 61,734-E; HON. ABE LOPEZ, PRESIDING

_______________________________

On Motion to Dismiss

_______________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Donald Dale Stemple, appellant, by and through his attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because the parties have fully compromised and settled all issues in dispute and neither desire to pursue the appeal. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(2) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

Brian Quinn

Justice

l assault and five years imprisonment for the indecency offenses. Appellant timely appealed the decision and received appointed counsel.

Appellant's counsel moved to withdraw, after filing a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) and representing that he searched the record and found no arguable grounds for reversal. The record illustrates that counsel notified appellant of his right to review the appellate record and file his own brief or response. We also informed appellant that any response he cared to file had to be filed by April 28, 2005. To date, appellant has neither filed a pro se response nor moved for an extension of the April 28th deadline.

The sole ground raised by counsel involved the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence. And, in addressing it, counsel explained why the evidence was sufficient to satisfy both standards. We too reviewed the evidence of record and found it to be both legally and factually sufficient to support the convictions. Our independent review of the appellate record also failed to uncover any other type of arguably reversible error. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requiring us to conduct an independent review).

Accordingly, we grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the trial court viz cause numbers B-15,450-0403 and B-15,449-0403, counts II and III.

Do not publish.