Steven Charles Henry v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Criminal District Court of Jefferson County

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-02-328 CR
NO. 09-02-329 CR
____________________
STEVEN CHARLES HENRY, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause Nos. 86242 and 86243
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Steven Charles Henry pleaded guilty to separate indictments for the state jail felony offense of burglary of a building. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. 30.02 (a)(3),(c) (Vernon 2003). Pursuant to plea bargain agreements between Henry and the State, the trial court sentenced Henry to a two year term of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, State Jail Division, in both causes, with the sentences to be served concurrently with sentences assessed in four cases that had been previously deferred.

Appellate counsel filed briefs that conclude no arguable error is presented in these appeals. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On December 5, 2002, we granted Henry an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. Because the appeals involve the application of well-settled principles of law, we deliver this memorandum opinion. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

Henry did not file a pro se brief, but did complain about the appointment of appellate counsel. Henry complains that the crime scene is next door to counsel's office and counsel is personally acquainted with the victims. We have reviewed the appellant's objections, and find them to be insufficient to demonstrate conflict of interest.

The general notices of appeal filed by Henry failed to invoke our appellate jurisdiction. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428-29 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). (1)

We have reviewed the clerk's records and the reporter's records, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Henry raises no points of error over which we have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction.

APPEALS DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

 

Submitted on March 26, 2003

Opinion Delivered April 2, 2003

Do Not Publish

 

Before McKeithen, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.

1. For appeals commenced before January 1, 2003, the notice of appeal must specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3).