Sailer, Craig Michael v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 183rd District Court of Harris County

Opinion issued March 20, 2003

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-02-00385-CR

____________

CRAIG MICHAEL SAILER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 183rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 701657

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Craig Michael Sailer, filed a timely pro se notice of appeal from the trial court's judgment adjudicating his guilt in cause number 701657. At the adjudication hearing, appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the State's motion to adjudicate, the trial court found him guilty of theft of property of the value of $20,000 or more but less than $100,000, and, in accordance with a plea bargain agreement, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for six years. We affirm.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds of error to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref'd).

The brief states that a copy was delivered to appellant, whom counsel advised by letter of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We grant counsel's motion to withdraw from the case. (1) See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

Panel consists of Justices Hedges, Jennings, and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

1. Counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and also to inform appellant that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).