Opinion
No. 01-03-01134-CR
Opinion issued September 30, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 337th District Court Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 592647.
Panel consists of Justices NUCHIA, HANKS, and HIGLEY.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted appellant, Vernon King, Jr., of murder and assessed punishment at confinement for life. The Sixth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment. King v. State, No. 6-91-055-CR, slip op. at 13 (Tex.App.-Texarkana June 30, 1992, pet. ref'd) (not designated for publication). Appellant subsequently requested appointment of counsel for the purpose of filing a motion for forensic DNA testing of evidence. The motion was filed by appellant's counsel, and the State filed a motion in opposition. The trial court denied the motion for DNA testing on August 27, 2003. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. We affirm. Appellant's court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref'd). Counsel represents that she 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. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).
Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of his appeal and also to inform him that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997).