Donald Davison v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 278th District Court of Walker County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-06-00292-CR

Donald Davison,

Appellant

v.

The State of Texas,

Appellee

From the 278th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 23113

MEMORANDUM Opinion

Davison pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery and elected to have his punishment assessed by a jury. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. 29.03(a) (Vernon 2003). Davison appeals. Davison s counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We affirm.

The brief exhaustively reviews the voluntariness of Davison s plea. Although counsel informed Davison of the right to file a brief, Davison did not file one. The State did not file a response.

We must, after a full examination of all the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous. Anders at 744; accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Coronado v. State, 996 S.W.2d 283, 285 (Tex. App. Waco 1999, order) (per curiam), disp. on merits, 25 S.W.3d 806 (Tex. App. Waco 2000, pet. ref d). An appeal is wholly frivolous or without merit when it lacks any basis in law or fact. McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n.10 (1988). Arguments are frivolous when they cannot conceivably persuade the court. Id. at 436. An appeal is not wholly frivolous when it is based on arguable grounds. Stafford at 511.

We determine that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm. Counsel must advise Davison of our decision and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 694 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.). We grant counsel s motion to withdraw. See Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Reyna

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed January 2, 2008

Do not publish

[CR25]