NO. 07-05-0365-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
JULY 25, 2006
______________________________
RAMON TORREZ, APPELLANT
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
_________________________________
FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;
NO. 2005-494,587; HON. LARRY B. LADD, PRESIDING
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Ramon Torrez appeals his conviction by jury of failure to identify while a
fugitive from justice and his court-imposed sentence of 300 days in the Lubbock County
Jail. We will affirm the trial court’s judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Appellant’s counsel has filed a brief stating that he has carefully reviewed the record
in this case and concludes there is no reversible error and that the appeal is frivolous. See
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Counsel also has filed a motion to
withdraw as attorney for appellant and, by letter, has informed appellant of his right to file
a pro se brief. Johnson v. State, 885 S.W.2d 641, 646 (Tex.App.-Waco 1994, pet. ref'd).
By letter dated February 22, 2006, this court also notified appellant of his opportunity to
submit a response to the Anders brief and motion to withdraw filed by his counsel, granting
him until March 24, 2006 to do so. This court’s letter also reminded appellant to contact
his counsel if he needed to review any part of the appellate record to prepare a response.
Appellant has not filed a brief or other response.
We have independently examined the entire record to determine whether there are
any non-frivolous grounds which might support the appeal. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75 (1988); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). We have found
no such grounds. After reviewing the record before us and counsel’s brief, we agree with
counsel that the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex.Crim.App.
2005).
Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted and the trial court’s judgment
is affirmed.
James T. Campbell
Justice
Do not publish.
2