Opinion
No. 10-05-00229-CR
Opinion delivered and filed January 25, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 54th District Court, McLennan County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2005-325-C. Affirmed.
Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and Justice REYNA.
MEMORANDUM Opinion
Montgomery pleaded guilty to failure to comply with sex offender registration. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 62.10(a) (Vernon 2005). Montgomery appeals. Montgomery's counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We affirm. The brief exhaustively reviews the trial court's admonitions to Montgomery, including the voluntariness of Montgomery's plea and the sufficiency of the evidence; and Montgomery's sentence. Counsel concludes, "no non-frivolous issues exist." Although counsel informed Montgomery of the right to file a brief, Montgomery did not file one. The State did not file a response. We must, "after a full examination of all the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders at 744; accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991); Coronado v. State, 996 S.W.2d 283, 285 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order) (per curiam), disp. on merits, 25 S.W.3d 806 (Tex.App.-Waco 2000, pet. ref'd). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10 (1988). Arguments are frivolous when they "cannot conceivably persuade the court." Id. at 436. An appeal is not wholly frivolous when it is based on "arguable grounds." Stafford at 511. We determine that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm. Counsel must advise Montgomery of our decision and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 694 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.).