COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
CHERYL LYNN KAROW, )
) No. 08-03-00056-CR
Appellant, )
) Appeal from the
v. )
) 143rd District Court
THE STATE OF TEXAS, )
) of Reeves County, Texas
Appellee. )
) (TC# 01-04-06522-CRR)
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This appeal arises from a deferred adjudication of guilt. On June 29, 2001, Appellant Cheryl Lynn Karow, based on an agreed plea, was found guilty of the offense of delivery of a controlled substance. The trial court admonished Appellant as to the consequences of a plea of guilty, accepted Appellant=s guilty plea, and found the evidence sufficient for a finding of guilt. The trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed Appellant on probation for 3 years and assessed a fine of $750. Appellant was served with the conditions of her probation.
On November 30, 2001, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging Appellant had violated the conditions of her probation. At the hearing on January 17, 2003, Appellant entered a plea of not true to the State=s allegations in the motion. After hearing the testimony presented at the hearing, the trial court found that Appellant had violated the terms and conditions of her probation. The trial court found Appellant guilty as indicted and sentenced Appellant to eighteen months= confinement in the penitentiary and no fine. The trial court=s sentence and judgment were entered on January 17, 2003. Appellant timely filed her notice of appeal.
Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. 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 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). A copy of counsel=s brief has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment is affirmed.
January 22, 2004
DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Justice
Before Panel No. 1
Larsen, McClure, and Chew, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)