Manuel Beltran, Jr. v. State

Opinion

Opinion issued December 4, 2003

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-03-00586-CR

____________

MANUEL BELTRAN, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 230th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 487001

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               This is an appeal from the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for forensic DNA testing of evidence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 64.01, 64.05 (Vernon Supp. 2004). We affirm.

               Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds of error to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

               The brief states that a copy was delivered to appellant, whom counsel advised by letter of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

               We affirm the order of the trial court.

               We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Alcala, and Hanks.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).