William Cody Eaton v. State

Opinion

Motion to Withdraw Granted, Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 21, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-00070-CR

____________

WILLIAM CODY EATON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 411th District Court Polk County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 21,510

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to being a felon unlawfully in possession of a firearm. On January 4, 2012, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for seven years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes 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 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of

2

the record and 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. Counsel provided appellant with a copy of the appellate record and advised him of the right to file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than sixty days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Seymore and Brown. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).