Willie Wilson v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-10-00203-CR Willie Wilson, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 427TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-DC-09-204129, HONORABLE JIM CORONADO, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant was convicted of drug possession, enhanced by several prior convictions, and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. Appellant’s appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743-44 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at 743-44; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant’s attorney sent appellant a copy of the brief and advised him that he had the right to examine the record and file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972). No pro se brief has been filed.

We have considered the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We have reviewed the evidence presented and the procedures that were observed and find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of conviction.1

___________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Rose Affirmed Filed: March 23, 2011 Do Not Publish