Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas

Opinion filed October 8, 2009

 

 

Opinion filed October 8, 2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                        In The

                                                                             

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                  ___________

 

                                                          No. 11-09-00197-CR

                                           __________

 

        STEPHANIE LAVON WORD A/K/A STEPHANIE PAYNE, Appellant

 

                                                             V.

 

                                         STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

                                         On Appeal from the 104th District Court

 

                                                          Taylor County, Texas

 

                                                  Trial Court Cause No. 16863B

 

 

                                             M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

The jury convicted Stephanie Lavon Work a/k/a Stephanie Payne of the offense of theft.  The trial court assessed her punishment at confinement for twenty-three months in a state jail facility.  We dismiss the appeal.


Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw.  The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous.  Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of her right to review the record and file a response to counsel=s brief.  A response has not been filed.  Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.CEastland 2005, no pet.).

Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit.  We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.  Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  Likewise, this court advises appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 66.  Black v. State217 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.CEastland 2007, no pet.).

The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

October 8, 2009         

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.