Case Information

*1 Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 10, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-15-00275-CR

SEAN MICHAEL WHEELER, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 179th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1390131 M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a guilty plea to murder. On December 1, 2014, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 50 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of *2 Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. 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 we agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. We are not to address the merits of claims raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. 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 Justices Jamison, McCally, and Wise.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

2