Terrell T. Copeland v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 19, 2000
Docket04-99-00447-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Terrell T. Copeland v. State (Terrell T. Copeland v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Terrell T. Copeland v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

No. 04-99-00447-CR
Terrell COPELAND,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From County Court at Law No. 6, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 684,762
Honorable M'Liss Christian, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Alma L. López, Justice

Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice

Alma L. López, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 19, 2000

AFFIRMED

The appellant, Terrell Copeland, was convicted for the offense of driving while intoxicated (DWI), open container. Copeland was tried before a jury and found guilty. After the jury found Copeland guilty, the trial court sentenced Copeland to 45 days in jail and fined him $1,000.00.

Copeland filed a notice of appeal and the trial court appointed an attorney to represent him on appeal. The attorney studied the record and determined that no meritorious issues existed for an appeal. The attorney then prepared an Anders brief stating that she had diligently searched the record, researched applicable law, and concluded that the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. State, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Having concluded that the appeal was frivolous, the attorney advised Copeland of the results of her review, provided Copeland with a copy of her brief, advised Copeland of his right to file a pro se brief, and asked to withdraw from representation. See Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Copeland did not file his own brief.

We have reviewed the record and the brief. We agree with Copeland's attorney that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw.

DO NOT PUBLISH

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Bruns v. State
924 S.W.2d 176 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Terrell T. Copeland v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terrell-t-copeland-v-state-texapp-2000.