Frank Leon Thompson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 71st District Court of Harrison County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________ No. 06-08-00217-CR ______________________________ FRANK L. THOMPSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 71st Judicial District Court Harrison County, Texas Trial Court No. 08-0179X Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION Frank L. Thompson appeals from his conviction by a jury for theft. See TEX . PENAL CODE ANN . ยง 31.03 (Vernon Supp. 2008). The jury assessed Thompson's punishment at two years' confinement in a state-jail facility and a $10,000.00 fine. Thompson was represented by different, appointed counsel at trial and on appeal. Thompson's attorney has filed a brief in which he concludes, after a review of the record and the related law, that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel states that he has studied the record and finds no error preserved for appeal that could be successfully argued. The brief contains a professional evaluation of the record and advances three arguable grounds for review. This meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel mailed a copy of the brief to Thompson January 6, 2009, informing Thompson of his right to examine the entire appellate record and to file a pro se response. Counsel simultaneously filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. Thompson has not filed a response or a request for an extension of time in which to file such a response. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court.1 Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: March 11, 2009 March 12, 2009 Do Not Publish 1 Since we agree this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel's request to withdraw from further representation of Thompson in this case. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Thompson wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Thompson must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or Thompson must 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 was 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 TEX . R. APP . P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX . R. APP . P. 68.4. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
