eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2001-02

Ricky Gene Watkins v. State ( 2001 )


Menu:
 
  •      TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-00-00529-CR
Ricky Gene Watkins, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 49,086, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING
Appellant Ricky Gene Watkins pleaded guilty to possessing more than four grams
of methamphetamine. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(a), (d) (West Supp. 2001).
The district court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment at imprisonment for three years.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California,
    386 U.S. 738 
    (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio,
    488 U.S. 75 
    (1988); 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 was delivered to appellant, and appellant
was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief
has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the
appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Bea Ann Smith, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed: February 1, 2001
Do Not Publish
2