Alvin Eugene Ramsey Jr. A/K/A Alvin Eugene Ramsey v. State

NUMBER 13-10-00162-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

ALVIN EUGENE RAMSEY JR. A/K/A

ALVIN EUGENE RAMSEY, Appellant, v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 252nd District Court of Jefferson County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez

Appellant Alvin Eugene Ramsey Jr. a/k/a Alvin Eugene Ramsey, appeals from his conviction for the state jail offense of evading with a motor vehicle. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. ' 38.04(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2010). On April 20, 2009, after accepting appellant's plea of guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at two years' confinement in the state jail, probated over five years. In February 2010, the State filed a motion to revoke appellant's probation. At the hearing on the State's motion, appellant pleaded "not true" to the following alleged probation violations: (1) that appellant had committed the offense of a felon in possession of a firearm; and (2) that he failed to submit to a search of his home, vehicle, and person at the direction of a probation officer. The State presented evidence pertaining to the second violation, which the court found sufficient to establish a probation violation. The trial court revoked appellant's community supervision and assessed punishment at two years' confinement in the state jail. This appeal followed.1

Concluding that there are "no arguable grounds for reversal," counsel filed an Anders brief in which he reviewed the merits, or lack thereof, of the appeal. We affirm.

I. COMPLIANCE WITH ANDERS

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), appellant=s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief with this Court, stating that he could "find no meritorious issues for appeal." Counsel=s brief discusses the relevant portions of the record. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (AIn Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance >arguable= points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.@) (citing Hawkins v. State, 112

S.W.3d 340, 343-44 (Tex. App.BCorpus Christi 2003, no pet.)); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en banc).

In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978), appellant's counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there is no error in the trial court's judgment. Counsel informed this Court that he forwarded a copy of his motion to withdraw and supporting brief to appellant with a letter advising him of his right to review each record and to file a pro se response. 2 See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 510 n.3; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.23. More than an adequate period of time has passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se response. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409.

II. INDEPENDENT REVIEW

Upon receiving an Anders brief, this Court must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the case is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record in this case and counsel's brief, and we have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (ADue to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.@); Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 509. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

III. MOTION TO WITHDRAW In accordance with Anders, appellant's attorney has asked this Court for permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408 n.17 (citing Jeffery v. State, 903 S.W.2d 776, 779-80 (Tex. App.BDallas 1995, no pet.) ("If an attorney believes the appeal is frivolous, he must withdraw from representing the appellant. To withdraw from representation, the appointed attorney must file a motion to withdraw accompanied by a brief showing the appellate court that the appeal is frivolous.@) (Citations omitted.)). We grant counsel=s motion to withdraw that was carried with the case on January 14, 2011. Within five days of the date of this Court=s opinion, counsel is ordered to send a copy of this opinion and the judgment to appellant and to advise appellant of his right to file a petition for discretionary review.3 See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 412 n.35; Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670, 673 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ Justice Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

24th day of March, 2011.