Jonathan Harold Jones v. State

Opinion issued June 12, 2003












In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________


NO. 01-02-01260-CR

____________


JONATHAN HAROLD JONES, Appellant


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee





On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 901282




 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Jonathan Harold Jones, pleaded guilty to attempted aggravated kidnapping, and the trial court assessed punishment at confinement for seven years. We affirm.

               Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds of error to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

               The brief states that a copy was delivered to appellant, whom counsel advised by letter of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

               We affirm the judgment.

               We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Nuchia, and Keyes.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).