Quinton Jay Fontenette v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 8, 2007
• Docket: 14-06-00575-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 8, 2007

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 8, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00575-CR

QUINTON JAY FONTENETTE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1025326

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of arson.  On June 1, 2006, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for six years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he 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 forwarded to appellant on November 21, 2006.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  This court issued an order on November 30, 2006, directing the trial court to provide appellant with a copy of the record.  This order also advised appellant that his pro se response was due within 30 days after he received the record.  Appellant received a copy of the record on January 10, 2007.  As of this date, no pro se response or motion for extension has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed March 8, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Hudson.

Do Not Publish C Tex.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