Amber Dawn Hobgood v. State ( 2010 )


Menu:
  • i          i      i                                                                  i       i      i
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    No. 04-09-00767-CR
    Amber Dawn HOBGOOD,
    Appellant
    v.
    The STATE of Texas,
    Appellee
    From the County Court at Law No. 4, Bexar County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 235098
    Honorable Sarah Garrahan-Moulder, Judge Presiding
    Opinion by:       Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Sitting:          Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
    Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
    Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Delivered and Filed: September 15, 2010
    MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED
    Amber Dawn Hobgood was found guilty by a jury of possession of marihuana, 0-2 ounces.
    The trial court sentenced Hobgood to six months in jail and a $300.00 fine, suspended the imposition
    of the jail term, and placed Hobgood on probation for one year. Hobgood appeals the judgment.
    Hobgood’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which
    she raises an arguable point of error, but nonetheless concludes this appeal is frivolous and without
    merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), High v. State,
    04-09-00767-CR
    
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 
    436 S.W.2d 137
    (Tex. Crim. App.
    1969). Hobgood was provided a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was informed of her
    right to review the record and file her own brief. She has not done so.
    After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with
    counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-27 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Hobgood’s counsel and affirm the
    trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 
    954 S.W.2d 83
    , 86 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1997,
    no pet.); Bruns v. State, 
    924 S.W.2d 176
    , 177 n.1 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1996, no pet.).
    No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Hobgood wish to seek further review of this
    case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, she must either retain an attorney to file a petition for
    discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary
    review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion
    for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See TEX . R. APP . P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary
    review must be filed with this court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal
    Appeals along with the rest of the filings in this case. See 
    id. R. 68.3.
    Any petition for discretionary
    review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.
    See 
    id. R. 68.4.
    Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
    Do not publish
    -2-