Michael Torres v. State

Opinion issued June 7, 2007











In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________



NO. 01-06-00792-CR

____________



MICHAEL TORRES, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 977589




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Michael Torres, pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt, placed appellant on community supervision for five years.

The State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate guilt to which appellant pleaded not true. After a hearing, the trial court found to be true the State's allegation that appellant had violated the conditions of his community supervisionThe court found appellant guilty of the original charge, and sentenced him to confinement for 40 years. Appellant filed timely notice of appeal. We affirm.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel's 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 that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. 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).

Counsel represents that she served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant 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 without merit.

We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

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

We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes and Higley.

Do not publish.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

1.

Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of his appeal and also to inform him that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).