Winfrey, Remon Rondell v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 1, 2006
• Docket: 14-05-00147-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 1, 2006

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 1, 2006.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-05-00147-CR

REMON RONDELL WINFREY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 973,860

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver.  On January 20, 2005, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for twenty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a fine of $1,000.  Appellant filed a 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), 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 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 Memorandum Opinion filed June 1, 2006.

Panel consists of Justices Hudson, Fowler, and Seymore.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).