Fernando Villarreal v. State ( 2006 )

Becker v. State

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

FERNANDO VILLARREAL,                             Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS,                             Appellee.	§ § § § §  §	No. 08-06-00066-CR Appeal from the 143rd District Court of Reeves County, Texas (TC# 05-12-07056-CRR)

O P I N I O N

            Fernando Villarreal appeals his conviction of possession of more than four but less than 200 grams of cocaine. A jury found Appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at a fine of $10,000 and imprisonment for eleven years. We affirm.

            Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that 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, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S. Ct. 2094, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 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 has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

            We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment is affirmed.

September 21, 2006                                                    

                                                                                    ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice

Before Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.

Barajas, C.J., not participating

(Do Not Publish)