Tanya Cook v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 23rd District Court of Brazoria County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued August 7, 2008 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ____________ NOS. 01-07-00804-CR 01-08-00526-CR ____________ TANYA DENISE COOK, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 23rd District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 52210, Counts 1and 2 1 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Tanya Denise Cook, pleaded guilty in trial court case number 52210 to one count of theft and one count of perjury, and pleaded true to an enhancement paragraph for each count. Appellant s plea of guilty did not include an agreed 1 The Clerk of this Court has assigned the appeal of count 1 the case number 01-0700804-CR, and the appeal of count 2 the case number 01-08-00526-CR. recommendation as to punishment with the State. After a pre-sentence investigation hearing, the trial court assessed punishment at confinement for 14 years on each count and ordered that the sentences run concurrently. We affirm. Appellant s counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeals are without merit and are frivolous, and that the appeals must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App.1978). Counsel represents that she has served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of her 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. Having reviewed the record and counsel s brief, we agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 82627(Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We affirm the judgments of the trial court in case number 52210 count one and count two. Any pending motions are denied as moot. 2 Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted.2 PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Hanks, and Higley. . Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 2 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 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.
