Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 11, 2006.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-05-00445-CR
____________
LATISSUA DORTHEA JONES-HAMMOND, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 339th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 961,014
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
After a trial to the court, appellant was convicted of theft of over $200,000. On April 27, 2005, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for twelve years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely, written notice of appeal.
Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes 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 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
Appellant=s counsel certified to the court that a copy of the brief had been provided to appellant and she was advised of her right to examine the record and file a pro se response. More than sixty days passed without a response from appellant. Accordingly, the court reviewed the record, and concluded the appeal was without merit. On February 2, 2006, the court issued a memorandum opinion affirming the conviction.
On March 24, 2006, appellant filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file a pro se brief in response to the Anders brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We granted the request, and by order filed March 30, 2006, we withdrew our previous opinion, reinstated the appeal, and permitted appellant to file a response to counsel=s Anders brief. Appellant filed responses on April 6, April 10, and a final response on April 17, 2006.
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel=s brief, and appellant=s responses thereto. We conclude there are no arguable grounds presented for review, and we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed. May 11, 2006.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Guzman.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).