






Criminal Case Template






COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS



ENOCH COLWELL,

                            Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                            Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-04-00248-CR

Appeal from the

210th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20040D00471)




O P I N I O N

           This is an appeal from a jury conviction for the offense of theft (enhanced).  The jury
assessed punishment at eight and one-half years’ imprisonment and a fine of $3,500.  We
affirm.
           Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she has concluded that
the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87
S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436
S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel’s brief and the appellate record as
well as pertinent case law have been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised
of his right to file a pro se brief.  Appellant has filed a pro se brief.
           We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal
is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might
arguably support the appeal.  A discussion of the matter discussed in counsel’s brief and the
pro se brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
           The judgment is affirmed.
 
                                                                  RICHARD BARAJAS, Chief Justice
October 13, 2005

Before Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)
