Mark Edward Jackson, Jr. v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 19, 2004
• Docket: 13-03-00527-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-03-527-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MARK EDWARD JACKSON, JR.,                                              Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                     Appellee.

On appeal from the 24th District Court of Calhoun County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Garza

Appellant, Mark Edward Jackson, Jr., pled guilty to a charge of aggravated robbery and was sentenced by a jury to imprisonment for forty-five years. Appellant’s attorney has filed a brief in which he concludes that appellant has no non-frivolous grounds for appeal and requests to withdraw from the case. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Counsel states that he has reviewed the entire record diligently and investigated all possible grounds for appeal. He further states that he has been unable to identify any possible error to bring to this Court’s attention. Counsel certifies that he has served a copy of his brief on appellant and informed appellant of his right to file a pro se brief. More than thirty days have passed and no pro se brief has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6.

After reviewing the record, we agree with appellant’s counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). Although counsel’s brief does not advance any arguable issues for appeal, it does supply a professional evaluation of why the record presents no such issues. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). This Court’s independent review of the record has revealed no arguable grounds for appeal. See Ybarra v. State, 93 S.W.3d 922, 926 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.). The record shows that appellant pled guilty to aggravated robbery and received less than the maximum sentence for the offense. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 12.32 (Vernon 2003).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellant’s counsel is granted permission to withdraw from the case after he notifies appellant of the disposition of this appeal and of the availability of discretionary review. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

                                                                                      _______________________

                                                                                      DORI CONTRERAS GARZA,

                                                                                      Justice

Do not publish.

Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)

Memorandum Opinion delivered

and filed this the 19^th day of August, 2004.