Opinion
No. 4-06-00060-CR
Delivered and Filed: October 4, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2002-CR-5013, Honorable Mark R. Luitjen, Judge Presiding. Affirmed.
Sitting: Alma L. LÓPEZ, Chief Justice, Catherine STONE, Justice, Sarah B. DUNCAN, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kathleen Segovia was placed on deferred adjudication for the offense of possession of a controlled substance. Based on her plea of true, Segovia's guilt was subsequently adjudicated, and she was sentenced to two years in state jail. Segovia's court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Segovia with a copy of the brief and informed her of her right to review the record and file her own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n. 1 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Segovia filed a pro se letter asserting her belief that the trial court was overly harsh in sentencing her. After reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005) (noting court of appeals should not address merits of issues raised in Anders brief or pro se response but should only determine if the appeal is frivolous). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Appellate counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n. 1.