COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-09-00293-CR
|
William York |
|
APPELLANT |
|
V. |
||
|
The State of Texas |
|
STATE |
----------
FROM Criminal District Court No. 4 OF Tarrant COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]
----------
A jury convicted Appellant William York of theft of property under $1,500 after having been previously convicted of theft two or more times. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(e)(4)(D) (Vernon 2003). The jury assessed his punishment at one year and 364 days’ confinement, and the trial court sentenced him accordingly.
York’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California[2] by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. This court afforded York the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, and he has filed one. The State has also filed a brief.
As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, York’s pro se brief, and the State’s brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that arguably might support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: WALKER, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: January 6, 2011