COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-06-405-CR
SHEILA LANETTE CALHOUN APPELLANT
A/K/A SHEILA L. CALHOUN
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
------------
FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
------------
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
------------
Appellant Sheila Lanette Calhoun pled guilty to theft of property valued
under $1500 with two prior theft convictions. The jury found her guilty, found
that she had used or exhibited a deadly weapon during the offense, and
assessed her punishment at ten years’ confinement in the Institutional Division
1
See T EX. R. A PP. P. 47.4.
of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The trial court sentenced her accordingly.
Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. In the brief, counsel
avers that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous. 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 arguable
grounds for relief. Although Appellant was given an opportunity to file a brief,
she has not done so.
After an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw
on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of
Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the
record. 3 Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 4 Because
Appellant entered an open plea of guilty, our independent review for potential
error is limited to potential jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of her plea,
2
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).
3
See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991);
Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922-23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no
pet.).
4
See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351, 52
(1988).
2
error that is not independent of and supports the judgment of guilt, and error
occurring after entry of the guilty plea.5
We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief and the record. We agree
with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find
nothing in the record that arguably might support the appeal. 6 Accordingly, we
grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
PER CURIAM
PANEL F: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
T EX. R. A PP. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: March 6, 2008
5
See Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
6
See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
3