

 
NUMBER 13-99-547-CR 

COURT OF APPEALS 

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

CORPUS CHRISTI 
___________________________________________________________________ 

TRACY JOHNSON , Appellant, 


v. 


THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee. 
___________________________________________________________________ 


On appeal from the 319th District Court 
of Nueces County, Texas. 
____________________________________________________________________ 


O P I N I O N 

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Kennedy(1) 

Opinion by Justice Kennedy 


Appellant was indicted for possession of cocaine, less than one ounce. He pleaded guilty to the charge and was assessed a
term of two years in a state jail facility and a fine of $250. The jail term was suspended and he was placed on probation for
three years. Thereafter, he pleaded "true" to a motion to revoke and was sentenced to two years confinement in a state jail
facility. 
Appellant's court appointed attorney has filed a brief in which he has concluded that this appeal is wholly frivolous and
without merit. Anders v. California386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a
professional evaluation of why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an appeal. See Stafford v. State 813 S.W. 2d
503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Lindsey v. State, 902 S.W. 2d 9, 11 (Tex. App. - Corpus Christi 1995). 
Counsel states in his brief that he has served a copy of his brief on appellant and has advised him by letter of his opinion
that the appeal is without merit but that he (appellant) has the right to review the record and file a pro sebrief. Counsel
states further that he has furnished appellant with a copy of the transcript and statement of facts of this case. The record
shows that counsel has filed a motion for extension of time to file a pro se brief which motion this court has granted to a
new deadline of January 2, 2000. To this date no pro se brief has been filed. 
In Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) the Supreme Court discussed the responsibilities of an appellate court upon
receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief. The court stated: "once the appellate court receives this brief, it must then itself
conduct 'a full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.'" This we have done and
we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. We AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court. 
NOAH KENNEDY 
Justice 


Do not publish. 
Tex. R. App. P. 47.3. 




Opinion delivered and filed 
this the 23rd day of March, 2000. 
1. Retired Justice Noah Kennedy assigned to this Court by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas pursuant to
Tex. Gov't Code Ann. 74.003 (Vernon 1998). 
