Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2012

Katrina Moniac Matthews v. State

Katrina Moniac Matthews v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided March 22, 2012

Katrina Moniac Matthews v. State

Opinion


COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

 

 

NO. 02-11-00259-CR

 

 

KATRINA MONIAC MATTHEWS

 

APPELLANT

                                                                                                                            

V.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS

 

STATE

 

 

------------

FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

------------

          Appellant Katrina Moniac Matthews appeals the trial court’s judgment adjudicating her guilt of credit card abuse and sentencing her to two years’ confinement after revoking her deferred adjudication community supervision.  Matthews’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).  Matthews had the opportunity to file a pro se brief, but she has not done so.

          Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

          We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief.  We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly 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, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

 

                                                          PER CURIAM

 

PANEL:  MCCOY, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

 

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

 

DELIVERED:  March 22, 2012



[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

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