James Desmond Young v. State







NUMBER 13-07-619-CR



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG



JAMES DESMOND YOUNG, Appellant,



v.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 252nd District Court

of Jefferson County, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION



Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Vela

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez



Appellant, James Desmond Young, was indicted for the criminal offense of aggravated robbery. On March 29, 2007, the trial court deferred adjudication and placed appellant on probation for eight years. In July 2007, appellant pleaded true to two allegations in the State's motion to revoke probation--giving a fictitious name and violating curfew. On August 27, 2007, the trial court found both allegations true, adjudicated appellant's guilt, and sentenced appellant to 25 years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Department of Criminal Justice. Concluding that "there are no meritorious issues for appeal," appellant's counsel filed a brief in which he reviewed the merits, or lack thereof, of the appeal. The State agrees with counsel's conclusion that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. We affirm.I. Compliance with Anders v. California

Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed an Anders brief in which he has concluded that there are no appealable issues for this Court to consider. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant's brief meets the requirements of Anders. Id. at 744-45; see High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). In compliance with Anders, following his review of the court's file and the transcripts, his research, and his correspondence with appellant, counsel presented a professional evaluation of the record including, among other things, a review of grand jury proceedings, pre-trial motions, research and investigation, competency, sentencing, right to present evidence during the guilt/innocence and punishment stages, and right to appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Currie v. State,

516 S.W.2d 684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); see also High, 573 S.W.2d at 812.

Counsel has informed this Court that he has reviewed the appellate record and concludes there are no arguable grounds for reversal. He has also informed this Court that he provided appellant with a copy of the transcripts in his case and notified appellant of his right to review the record and to file a pro se response to counsel's brief and motion to withdraw. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744-45; see also Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en banc); High, 573 S.W.2d at 813. More than thirty days have passed, and no pro se brief has been filed.

II. Independent Review

The United States Supreme Court advised appellate courts that upon receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief, they must conduct "a full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); see Ybarra v. State, 93 S.W.3d 922, 926 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.). Accordingly, we have carefully reviewed the record and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 509. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827-28 ("Due to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.").

III. Conclusion

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Additionally, appellant's counsel's motion to withdraw as appellate counsel was carried with the case on January 10, 2008. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Having affirmed the judgment, we now grant counsel's motion to withdraw. We order counsel to notify appellant of the disposition of this appeal and of the availability of discretionary review. See In re K.D., S.D., and J.R., 127 S.W.2d 66, 68 n.3 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2003, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (en banc) (per curiam)).

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

Justice



Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).



Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this 13th day of March, 2008.