Opinion
No. 05-03-01411-CR
Opinion Filed July 1, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F86-89106-VM. Affirmed.
Before Justices WRIGHT, O'NEILL, and FRANCIS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1986, a jury convicted Roosevelt Hollins of sexual assault and assessed punishment at forty years' imprisonment. In 2002, appellant filed a request with the trial court for appointment of counsel to assist him in obtaining post-conviction DNA testing. The trial court appointed counsel and notified the State of appellant's request. In 2003, the State filed its response informing the trial court that the evidence subject to testing, a dress stained with seminal fluid, had been lost. On August 20, 2003, the trial court conducted a brief hearing in which the prosecutor and defense counsel both reported that their investigations showed there was no evidence in existence to test. The trial court then denied appellant's request. Appellant now appeals the trial court's order denying his request for post-conviction DNA testing. Appellant's attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant he has a right to file a pro se response. Appellant, however, did not file a pro se response. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court's judgment.