Alfred Reid Drew v. The State of Texas Appeal from 29th District Court of Palo Pinto County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed August 30, 2018 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals __________ No. 11-17-00336-CR __________ ALFRED REID DREW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pinto County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 16039 MEMORANDUM OPINION The jury convicted Appellant, Alfred Reid Drew, of the offense of burglary of a building and assessed his punishment at confinement for two years in a state jail facility and a fine of $10,000. We dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed in this court a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are no arguable issues to present in this appeal. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, and a motion for pro se access to the appellate record.1 Counsel advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4, 68. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Although Appellant requested and received an extension of time to file a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief, Appellant has not filed a response. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit and should be dismissed.2 See Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409. The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed. PER CURIAM August 30, 2018 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Willson, J., Bailey, J., and Wright, S.C.J. 3 Willson, J., not participating. 1 We note that Appellant filed that motion in this court and that the clerk of this court provided Appellant with a copy of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. 2 We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 68. 3 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment. 2
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.
