William James Foster v. State

Opinion issued October 30, 2008





















In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________



NO. 01-08-00077-CR

____________



WILLIAM JAMES FOSTER, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 339th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1125443




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, William James Foster, without an agreed punishment recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the offense of arson. Appellant also pleaded true to the allegations contained in one enhancement paragraph. The trial court ordered a presentence investigation and rescheduled the cases. After a presentence investigation hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 25 years.

Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

Counsel represents that he has 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. Having reviewed the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27(Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. (1)

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Taft, Keyes, and Alcala.

Do not publish.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

















1.

Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27(Tex. Crim. App. 2005).