Opinion
No. 14-03-01377-CR
Opinion filed September 23, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 209th District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 939,759. Affirmed.
Panel consists of Justices YATES, EDELMAN, and GUZMAN.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After the State abandoned a deadly weapon paragraph, Appellant entered a guilty plea to possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, cocaine, weighing more than four grams but less than 200 grams. Appellant's plea was made without an agreed recommendation for punishment, and he filed a motion for community supervision. After a pre-trial investigation hearing, the trial court assessed punishment of five years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, the minimum confinement for a first degree felony. Appellant's counsel is retained. He filed a brief in which, after reviewing the record, he concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit, purportedly under the authority of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967). The Anders procedural safeguards are not applicable, however, to an appellant who is represented by a retained attorney. See Nguyen v. State, 11 S.W.3d 376, 379 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, no pet.). Appellant's counsel filed a motion to withdraw, which the Court granted, after assuring his compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5. The Court then ordered the Anders brief stricken and gave appellant thirty days to obtain new counsel to file a brief on his behalf or file a pro se brief. More than sixty days have elapsed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief or had an attorney file a new brief on his behalf. We have reviewed the record on appeal and agree with appellant's former appellate attorney that the appeal lacks merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. See Nguyen, 11 S.W. 3d at 379-80.