|
|
COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
|
CEDRIC LIONEL KIDD, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. |
'
'
'
'
'
' |
No. 08-01-00413-CR Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas (TC# F-0151612-TI) |
O P I N I O N
In the second of two companion cases, Cedric Lionel Kidd was indicted for possession of a firearm within five years after his release from confinement following a conviction for a prior felony offense. The State presented a conviction for theft and a conviction for burglary of a habitation for enhancement purposes. Kidd pleaded not guilty to the offense but pleaded true to the enhancement paragraphs.
The jury found Kidd guilty of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. A twenty-five year sentence was imposed by the trial court judge. We affirm.
Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed his motion to withdraw, together with a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is frivolous. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972).
A copy of counsel=s motion, the brief, and the appellate record have been delivered to appellant, and appellant has been advised of his right to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment is affirmed.
SUSAN LARSEN, Justice
September 5, 2002
Before Panel No. 1
Larsen, McClure, and Chew, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)