Case Information
*1 Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 26, 2017.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00695-CR
WILLIE THOMAS, Appellant V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 185th District Court
Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1483177 M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant Willie Thomas appeals his conviction for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, 4–200 grams. Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112 (a), (d) (West 2016). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the records and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. *2 App. 1978).
A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of his right to inspect the appellate record and file a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justices Frost and Justices Boyce and Jewell.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2