James Alexander, Jr. v. State

In The Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

_________________________

No. 06-12-00028-CR ______________________________ JAMES ALEXANDER, JR., Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 188th Judicial District Court

Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 40852-A

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The video surveillance recording showed James Alexander, Jr., wielding a prybar and a block of wood to break into coin-operated machines in a Gregg County self-service laundry and removing coins from the broken machines. Alexander was caught a short distance from the laundry, his pockets full of coins. Though he pled not guilty, Alexander admitted in his testimony that he committed the acts alleged, but defended with the claim that he could not restrain himself and the assertion that the damage did not accumulate to as much as $1,500.00.

Alexander appeals from his resulting conviction for a state jail felony, criminal mischief and his sentence of eighteen months in a state jail facility.

Alexander’s attorney on appeal has filed a brief that states he has reviewed the record, sets out the course of the prosecution and evidence, and concludes that he has found no issues that could be raised. Counsel has thus provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. This meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981); and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978).

Counsel mailed a copy of the brief to Alexander June 22, 2012, along with a copy of his motion to withdraw and his letter informing Alexander of his right to file a pro se response and his right to review the record. No response or request for any extension of time has been filed by Alexander. Counsel has also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.

We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and find no genuinely arguable issue. See Halbert v. Michigan, 545 U.S. 605, 623 (U.S. 2005). We, therefore, agree with counsel’s assessment that no arguable issues support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.1

Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice

Date Submitted: August 28, 2012 Date Decided: September 4, 2012 Do Not Publish