From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Campa v. State

Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
Jul 7, 2014
No. 07-13-00433-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2014)

Opinion

No. 07-13-00433-CR

07-07-2014

HAROLD WAYNE CAMPA, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE


On Appeal from the 242nd District Court

Hale County, Texas

Trial Court No. B19400-1302, Honorable Edward Lee Self, Presiding


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL, J.J. and BOYD, S.J.

Senior Justice John T. Boyd, sitting by assignment.

Harold Wayne Campa, appellant, appeals his conviction for Driving While Intoxicated. Appellant was tried and found guilty by a jury and was assessed five years in prison. Appellant's counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders brief, wherein he certifies that, after diligently searching the record, he has concluded that the appeal is without merit. Along with his brief, he has filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing him of counsel's belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant's right to file a pro se response. By letter dated May 16, 2014, this court also notified appellant of his right to file his own brief or response by June 16, 2014, if he wished to do so. To date, no response has been received.

See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel discussed potential areas for appeal which included the indictment, pretrial discovery, a pretrial motion for continuance, motion to suppress a recorded statement, adverse rulings made at trial, jury selection and charge, sufficiency of the evidence to support conviction and the punishment assessed, and the denial of a motion for new trial. However, he then explained why the issues lacked merit.

In addition, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of counsel's conclusions and to uncover arguable error pursuant to In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). After doing so, we concurred with counsel's conclusions.

Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment is affirmed.

Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review with the Court of Criminal Appeals.
--------

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice
Do not publish.


Summaries of

Campa v. State

Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
Jul 7, 2014
No. 07-13-00433-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2014)
Case details for

Campa v. State

Case Details

Full title:HAROLD WAYNE CAMPA, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

Court:Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

Date published: Jul 7, 2014

Citations

No. 07-13-00433-CR (Tex. App. Jul. 7, 2014)