Don Almeida v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 179th District Court of Harris County

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

)

DON ALMEIDA, ) No. 08-04-00270-CR

)

Appellant, ) Appeal from

)

v. ) 179th District Court

)

THE STATE OF TEXAS, ) of Harris County, Texas

)

Appellee. ) (TC# 982455)

O P I N I O N

Don Almeida appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered a plea of guilty before the court without an agreed recommendation. The trial court sentenced Appellant to one year in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice State Jail Division. We affirm.

Appellant s 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 advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. 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. A pro se brief has been filed.

The record reflects that Appellant was admonished of the consequences of his guilty plea pursuant to Article 26.13 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and Appellant made a judicial confession admitting his guilt. Based upon the record before us, the guilty plea appears to have been freely and voluntarily made by Appellant.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel s brief, and the pro se 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. A further discussion of the arguable ground advanced in counsel s brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. The judgment is affirmed.

August 4, 2005

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice

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

(Do Not Publish)