IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
MAY 13, 2003
______________________________
MARTIN B. JONES, M.D., APPELLANT
V.
TEMPLETON, SMITHEE, HAYES, FIELDS, YOUNG & HEINRICH, AND JOE W. HAYES, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLEES
_________________________________
FROM THE 181ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;
NO. 88,059-B; HONORABLE VANN CULP, JUDGE
_______________________________
Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION (1)Appellant Martin B. Jones, M.D. filed a notice of appeal challenging the trial court's summary judgment in favor of appellees Templeton, et al., and Joe W. Hayes, individually. Pending before this Court is an agreed motion to dismiss the appeal by which the parties represent that they have executed a settlement agreement disposing of all issues.
Without passing on the merits of the case, pursuant to Rule 42.1(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at the request of all parties no motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.
Don H. Reavis
Justice
1. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(a).
le; text-indent: 0in } body { font-family: "Arial", sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }
NO. 07-09-0160-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
OCTOBER 7, 2009
______________________________
BRANDON MCDONALD,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE 110TH DISTRICT COURT OF FLOYD COUNTY;
NO. 4375; HON. WILLIAM P. SMITH, PRESIDING
_______________________________
Memorandum Anders Opinion
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Appellant Brandon McDonald appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation with intent to commit sexual assault. A jury found him guilty of the offense and assessed punishment at sixty years in prison. Appellant timely filed his notice of appeal.
Appellant’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders brief, wherein he certifies that, after diligently searching the record, he has concluded that appellant’s appeal is without merit. Along with his brief, he has filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel’s belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant’s right to appeal pro se. By letter dated July 30, 2009, this court notified appellant of his right to file his own brief or response by August 31, 2009, if he wished to do so. Appellant filed a request for extension of time to file his response which was granted to September 30, 2009. To date no response has been filed.
In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel discussed one potential area for error which was the denial of appellant’s request for jury instructions on the lesser included offenses of 1) burglary of a habitation, 2) criminal trespass and 3) sexual assault. Upon his final analysis, counsel determined no reversible error existed. Thereafter, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel’s conclusions and to uncover any error, reversible or otherwise, pursuant to Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), and concluded the same.
Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment is affirmed.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.