
Opinion issued September 25, 2008












In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________

NOS. 01-06-01081-CR
          01-06-01082-CR
          01-06-01083-CR
____________

DAMIAN REGINALD BLOW, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



On Appeal from the 174th District Court 
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 1041200, 1051712, 1051711



MEMORANDUM  OPINION
	Appellant, Damian Reginald Blow, pleaded guilty to three separate felony
offenses of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance.  After a
presentence investigation hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant in each case  to
confinement for 10 years.  We affirm.
	Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the records  present 
no reversible error, that the appeals are without merit and are frivolous, and that the
appeals must be dismissed or affirmed.  See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87
S.Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a
professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds
for reversal.  Id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810
(Tex. Crim. App.1978). 
	Counsel represents that he has served a copy of the brief on appellant.  Counsel
also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se
brief.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  More than
30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief.  Having reviewed the
record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit
and that there is no reversible error.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27(Tex. Crim. App. 2005).  
	We affirm the judgments of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to
withdraw. (1) 
PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes, and Higley.
Do not publish.  Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).









1.    	Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and
that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).  
