Bobby Lee Woods v. State

NO. 07-09-0016-CR


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL B


FEBRUARY 3, 2009

______________________________



BOBBY LEE WOODS, APPELLANT


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

 

_________________________________


FROM THE 100TH DISTRICT COURT OF CARSON COUNTY;


NO. 3712; HONORABLE RICHARD DAMBOLD, JUDGE

_______________________________


Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

          Pending before the Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss his appeal. Appellant and his attorney have both signed the motion. Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). No decision of this Court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No motion for rehearing will be entertained and our mandate will issue forthwith.

                                                                           James T. Campbell

                                                                                     Justice



Do not publish.

e 26.13(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex.Code.Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13 (Vernon 1989 & Supp. 2004).

Article 26.13(d) expressly authorizes the admonitions required by that statute to be given orally or in writing. The written plea admonishments signed by appellant on June 11, 2002 properly set out the range of punishment applicable to the offense charged. Appellant was sentenced within that range. Article 26.13(a)(1) requires only that a court advise a defendant of the applicable punishment range before accepting a plea of guilty. It does not require the admonition be repeated prior to adjudicating guilt when adjudication has been deferred.

The third potential issue raised by counsel discusses the standards for determining whether a defendant has been denied reasonably effective assistance of counsel. That discussion does not make reference to the record indicating appellant's trial counsel's performance was deficient, or that any deficiencies in his performance prejudiced the defense. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104, S.Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984).

Our review convinces us that appellate counsel conducted a complete review of the record. We have also made an independent examination of the entire record to determine whether there are any arguable grounds which might support the appeal. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511. We agree it presents no meritorious grounds for review. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of the trial court.



James T. Campbell

Justice



Do not publish.