Marshall, Robert v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 23, 2004
• Docket: 14-03-01419-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 23, 2004

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 23, 2004.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-03-01419-CR

NO. 14-03-01425-CR

ROBERT NOLAN MARSHALL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 184th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 741,232 & 943,494

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

In January 1997, in cause number 741,232, appellant pleaded guilty to robbery and was placed on ten years= deferred adjudication probation.  On December 11, 2003, the trial court revoked appellant=s deferred adjudication probation and assessed punishment at twenty years= confinement.  In cause number 943,494, appellant pleaded guilty to murder and, on December 11, 2003, the trial court assessed punishment at eighty years= confinement.  Appellant filed written notices of appeal. 

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal in cause 741,232 is wholly frivolous and without merit as to any issue unrelated to appellant=s conviction.  See Vidaurri v. State, 49 S.W.3d 880, 885 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).  Counsel also notes that this court has no jurisdiction over an appeal from a trial court=s decision to adjudicate guilt.  Similarly, for cause 941,494, appellant=s appointed counsel concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), 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 file a pro se response, but no response has been filed.  

We agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.  Additionally, we do not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal related to the conviction in cause 741,232.   Vidaurri, 49 S.W.3d at 884.  Further, we find no reversible error in the records.  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 Memorandum Opinion filed September 23, 2004.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Edelman, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).