Walker, Shawn Cornelius v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 22, 2001
• Docket: 13-00-00037-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-00-037-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________

CORNELIUS

SHAWN WALKER, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 268th District Court of Fort Bend County, Texas. O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Rodriguez

Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez

Appellant Cornelius Shawn Walker pled not guilty to a charge of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle.⁽¹⁾ A jury found him guilty and sentenced him to two years incarceration and assessed a $3000 fine. Appellant appeals from the judgment.

Appellant's counsel filed briefs wherein counsel set out that he reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record. Counsel has informed this Court that the record revealed no arguable issue upon which a nonfrivolous appeal could be based.

Appellant's briefs satisfy the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Counsel presented a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates why there are no arguable grounds of error on appeal. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel certified in his briefs that he served appellant with a copy of the brief in which he informed appellant of his right to examine the record for the purposes of filing any pro se action he might feel appropriate under the circumstances. Thirty days have passed since appellant was so advised, and he has not filed any pro se brief.

Appellant's counsel requests this Court to provide appellant with a "sufficient and reasonable" time in which to file a request to have the appellate record made available to him and to move for an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief under the Anders procedure. Appellant's counsel further requests that if appellant makes no such request and motion, for this Court to direct the 268th District court to make available to appellant a copy of the appellate record and allow him at least thirty days from the date he receives the record to file a pro se brief. Appellant has had sufficient time to request the record and file a pro se brief. We deny these requests.

In Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), the Supreme Court advised appellate courts that upon receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief, they must conduct "a full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Penson, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have carefully reviewed the record and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

In accordance with Anders, counsel has requested permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. We grant appellant's attorney's motions to withdraw once counsel has completed our directions herein. We order counsel to notify appellant of the disposition of his appeal and of the availability of discretionary review. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

____________________ ROGELIO VALDEZ

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this 22nd day of February, 2001.

1. Tex. Pen. Code § 31.07 (Vernon 1994).