McGaha v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

McGaha v. State

491 S.W.2d 130

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 7, 1973

DocketNo. 46559

StatusPublished

This text of 491 S.W.2d 130 (McGaha v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McGaha v. State, 491 S.W.2d 130 (Tex. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

DAVIS, Commissioner.

Appeal is taken from a conviction of burglary with intent to commit theft. After the enhancement portion of the indictment had been dismissed on motion of the State, appellant entered a plea of guilty before the court and punishment was assessed at ten years.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a brief in which he concludes the present appeal is frivolous. Nevertheless, aware of his responsibility to do so, counsel has set out alleged grounds of error that might be considered for reversal in the event this court does not agree with him that the appeal is frivolous. Further, the record reflects that appellant has been served with a copy of appellant’s brief. No pro se brief has been filed. The procedure is in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 and Gainous v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 436 S.W.2d 137.

The record has been reviewed and the alleged grounds of error have been considered, and this court concludes that the appeal is without merit and wholly frivolous.

No motion for rehearing will be filed by the clerk except by leave of this Court upon a showing of good cause.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

DAVIS, Commissioner.

Appeal is taken from a conviction of burglary with intent to commit theft. After the enhancement portion of the indictment had been dismissed on motion of the State, appellant entered a plea of guilty before the court and punishment was assessed at ten years.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a brief in which he concludes the present appeal is frivolous. Nevertheless, aware of his responsibility to do so, counsel has set out alleged grounds of error that might be considered for reversal in the event this court does not agree with him that the appeal is frivolous. Further, the record reflects that appellant has been served with a copy of appellant’s brief. No pro se brief has been filed. The procedure is in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 and Gainous v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 436 S.W.2d 137.

The record has been reviewed and the alleged grounds of error have been considered, and this court concludes that the appeal is without merit and wholly frivolous.

No motion for rehearing will be filed by the clerk except by leave of this Court upon a showing of good cause.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

491 S.W.2d 130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgaha-v-state-texcrimapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack