Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2008

Roger Andrews v. State

Roger Andrews v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided December 17, 2008

Roger Andrews v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN






NO. 03-08-00416-CR


Roger Andrews, Appellant



v.



The State of Texas, Appellee






FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-DC-07-301105, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING


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



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. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.



___________________________________________

Diane M. Henson, Justice



Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: December 17, 2008

Do Not Publish

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