TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
NO. D-1-DC-05-900254, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING
A jury found appellant guilty of murder. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.02 (West 2003). The trial court assessed punishment at imprisonment for life and ordered that the sentence run consecutively to the life sentence appellant previously received for another murder.
The deceased was bludgeoned, strangled, and sexually assaulted in June 1990. Appellant was indicted in August 2005 after his DNA was found in biological samples that had been taken from the deceased's body and preserved during the initial investigation.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by 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 thorough, 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). Appellant 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.
___________________________________________
Jan P. Patterson, Justice
Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop
Affirmed
Filed: February 6, 2009
Do Not Publish