Zachery Leatch v. State

Affirmed and Opinion Filed July 29, 2015 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-01496-CR ZACHERY LEATCH, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12-51448-R MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Francis, Lang-Miers, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Whitehill Zachery Leatch appeals his conviction, following the adjudication of his guilt, for burglary of a habitation. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 30.02(a)(1) (West 2011). The trial court assessed punishment at six years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases). We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt. Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 141496F.U05   /Bill Whitehill/   BILL WHITEHILL   JUSTICE   ‐2‐    Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT ZACHERY LEATCH, Appellant Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. No. 05-14-01496-CR V. F12-51448-R). Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill, THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Francis and Lang-Miers participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment adjudicating guilt is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered July 29, 2015         ‐3‐