Donald Ray Brown v. State

Summarize Case

Related Cases

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                               COURT OF APPEALS

                                                 SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                                FORT WORTH

 

 

                                        NO. 2-05-152-CR

 

 

DONALD RAY BROWN                                                         APPELLANT

 

                                                   V.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS                                                                STATE

 

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

 

              FROM THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOOD COUNTY

 

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

 

                                MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

 

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

Appellant Donald Ray Brown appeals from a conviction for possession of  chemicals with intent to manufacture a controlled substance, namely methamphetamine.  A jury convicted him and assessed his punishment at fifteen years= confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  The trial court sentenced him accordingly.

Appellant=s court‑appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  In his brief, counsel has reviewed the history of the case, including detailing the evidence presented. Counsel=s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California[2] by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no reversible grounds on appeal and referencing any grounds that might arguably support the appeal.[3]  Although this court notified Appellant that he could file a pro se brief, he did not do so.

In our duties as a reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is frivolous.[4]  Only then may we grant counsel=s motion to withdraw.[5]  We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief.  We agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.[6]  Therefore, we grant the motion to withdraw filed by Appellant=s counsel and affirm the trial court=s judgment.

PER CURIAM

PANEL F:    DAUPHINOT, J.; CAYCE, C.J.; and LIVINGSTON, J.

DO NOT PUBLISH

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

 

DELIVERED:  May 11, 2006


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

[3]See Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922‑23 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1995, no pet.).

[4]See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 923.

[5]See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83‑84, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

[6]See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).