eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2005-09

Daniel Darrell Ford v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:
 
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-04-00615-CR
Daniel Darrell Ford, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 331ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 3032306, HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Daniel Darrell Ford pleaded guilty to an indictment accusing him of sexual
assault of a child. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.011 (West Supp. 2004-05). The court adjudged
him guilty and imposed a fifteen-year prison sentence.
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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and 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. Counsel’s
motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Bob Pemberton, Justice
Before Justices B. A. Smith, Puryear and Pemberton
Affirmed
Filed: September 15, 2005
Do Not Publish
2