TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-04-00693-CR
Michael E. Merritt, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 50107, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In January 2000, appellant Michael E. Merritt pleaded guilty to possessing more than
one gram of cocaine. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115 (West 2003). He also
admitted having two previous felony convictions. The court deferred adjudication and placed Merritt
on community supervision. In September 2004, the court adjudicated Merritt guilty after a hearing
on the State’s motion and sentenced him to twenty-five years’ imprisonment.
Merritt’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable
grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d
807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v.
State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App.
1969). Merritt received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine the
appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
___________________________________________
Bea Ann Smith, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Pemberton
Affirmed
Filed: June 16, 2005
Do Not Publish
2