Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2007

Andre Marquis Thomas v. State

Andre Marquis Thomas v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided June 29, 2007

Andre Marquis Thomas v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN






NO. 03-07-00095-CR


Andre Marquis Thomas, Appellant


v.



The State of Texas, Appellee






FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 59206, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING


M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N


Appellant Andre Marquis Thomas pleaded guilty to possession more than four grams of cocaine with intent to deliver. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112(a), (d) (West 2003). The district court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment at twenty-three years' imprisonment.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel's brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.



__________________________________________

G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop

Affirmed

Filed: June 29, 2007

Do Not Publish

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.