Benito Segura v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 195th District Court of Dallas County

11th Court of Appeals

Eastland, Texas

Opinion

Benito Segura

Appellant

Vs. No. 11-02-00223-CR B Appeal from Dallas County

State of Texas

Appellee

The trial court convicted appellant, upon his plea of nolo contendere, of stalking. A plea bargain agreement was not entered. The trial court assessed his punishment at confinement for 10 years and a $10,000 fine. We affirm.

Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she states that she has examined the entire record for issues that might support reversal on appeal and that she has concluded that there are no non-frivolous points of error.

Counsel briefs six issues to support her conclusion: sufficiency of the indictment, voluntariness of appellant=s plea, admissibility of items recovered from appellant=s car, sufficiency of the evidence, validity of judgment and sentence, and effectiveness of trial counsel. Counsel discusses the facts and the applicable law in each issue and concludes that there is no reversible error.

Counsel has furnished appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of his right to review the record and file a pro se brief. A pro se brief has not been filed. Counsel has complied with the procedures outlined in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.Cr.App.1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Cr.App.1969).

Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record. We agree that the appeal is without merit.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

June 18, 2003

Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Arnot, C.J., and

Wright, J., and McCall, J.