Washington II, Edward Lee v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 30, 2002
• Docket: 14-01-01013-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002

Affirmed and Opinion filed May 30, 2002.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-01-01013-CR

EDWARD LEE WASHINGTON, II, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 865,081

M E M O R A N D U M  O P I N I O N

After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of possession of a controlled substance.  On August 28, 2001, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 30 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes that 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, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by 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 delivered to appellant.  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).  As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that 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 Opinion filed May 30, 2002.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do not publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).