
   NO. 12-02-00149-CR


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT


TYLER, TEXAS

MARTY SHANE MCCANN,§
		APPEAL FROM THE 
APPELLANT

V.§
		COUNTY COURT AT LAW #2

THE STATE OF TEXAS,
APPELLEE§
		SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
 
MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM


	Marty Shane McCann ("Appellant") appeals his conviction for attempted burglary of a motor
vehicle for which he was sentenced to 180 days of confinement in the Smith County Jail. 
Appellant's counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct.
1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967) and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  We
affirm.

Background
	Appellant was charged by information with the offense of attempted burglary of a motor
vehicle.  On May 13, 2002, his case was tried to a jury and a guilty verdict was rendered on May 14.
Appellant elected to have the court assess his punishment and was sentenced to 180 days of
confinement.  Appellant timely filed his notice of appeal on May 14.

Analysis Pursuant to Anders v. California
	Appellant's counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders and Gainous, stating that he has
diligently reviewed the appellate record and is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible
error and that there is no error upon which an appeal can be predicated.  He further relates that he
is well acquainted with the facts in this case.  In compliance with Anders, Gainous, and High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), Appellant's brief presents a chronological
summation of the procedural history of the case, and further states that Appellant's counsel is unable
to raise any arguable issues for appeal.  We have likewise reviewed the record for reversible error
and have found none.
	As required by Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), Appellant's
counsel has moved for leave to withdraw.  We carried the motion for consideration with the merits
of the appeal.  Having done so and finding no reversible error, Appellant's counsel's motion for
leave to withdraw is hereby granted and the trial court's judgment is affirmed.



Opinion delivered October 29, 2003.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and DeVasto, J.



















(DO NOT PUBLISH)
