William York v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided January 6, 2011·No. 02-09-00293-CR·Published

Opinion

02-09-293-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-09-00293-CR

William York

APPELLANT

V.

The State of Texas

STATE

----------

FROM Criminal District Court No. 4 OF Tarrant COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

A jury convicted Appellant William York of theft of property under $1,500 after having been previously convicted of theft two or more times.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(e)(4)(D) (Vernon 2003).  The jury assessed his punishment at one year and 364 days’ confinement, and the trial court sentenced him accordingly.

          York’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California[2] by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  This court afforded York the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, and he has filed one.  The State has also filed a brief.

As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is frivolous.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, York’s pro se brief, and the State’s brief.  We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that arguably might support an appeal.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).  Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

PER CURIAM

PANEL:  WALKER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED:  January 6, 2011



          [1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

[2]386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).

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

William York v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2011).

William York v. State (William York v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Mays v. State
904 S.W.2d 920 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Bledsoe v. State
178 S.W.3d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)