Sarah Chapa v. State

Opinion

Opinion issued September 18, 2003

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-02-01071-CR

____________

SARAH CHAPA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 895124

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Sarah Chapa, pleaded guilty to theft in an aggregated amount of over two hundred thousand dollars, and the trial court assessed punishment at confinement for 18 years. We affirm.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed 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 her 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 judgment of the trial court. ⁽¹⁾

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Nuchia, and Higley.

Do not publish.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

1.

Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and also to inform appellant that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).