Trammel, Anthony Ray v. State

Opinion

AFFIRM; Opinion issued November 1, 2Oi2

in The Q!øurt uf Appeahi 3FiftI! thtrirt tif cca at E1 a11ai No O5.l2-4)O359-CR

ANTHONY RAY TRAMMEL, Appellant

TUE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No, F11-56323-I

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Richter, and Lang Opinion By Justice Richter

Aj ury convicted Anthony Ray Trammel of tampering with a government record and assessed

punishment at fourteen years’ imprisonment and a $5,000 fine. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed

a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the

requirements of Anders v. Calijbrnia, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional

evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High

v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 81 1 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the

brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a

pro se response. We have reviewed the record and counsels brief. See Bleds’oe v. State, I 78 SW.3d 824, 827

lex. Crini. App. 2005) (explaininu appellate courts duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal

is tii volous and wit bout merit. We find nothing iii the record that might arguably support the appeal.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Do Not Publish TEx. R. APP. P. 47

120359F.tJ05 ( I

QLUIr uf ppia1 6tfth TIj ri t nf ‘i it 11w JUDGMENT TH R \ I \ 1 pp 11 n Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas, (Tr.CLNo. 0 1 O0 I F1L-56323i). Opinion delivered by Justice Richter, I HF ST 1 1 0 1 pp 11 Justices Bridges and Lang participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered November 1, 2012.

IN RIC JU lICE.