Opinion
No. 05-04-00070-CR
Opinion Filed January 6, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 195th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F03-51124-VN. Affirmed.
Before Justices MOSELEY, RICHTER, and LANG-MIERS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kenneth Wayne Williams appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine in an amount of one gram or more but less than four grams, enhanced by two prior convictions. A jury found appellant guilty, found the enhancement paragraphs true, and assessed punishment at twenty five years' imprisonment. 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 filed a pro se response contending: (1) ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal because of errors in counsel's Anders brief; (2) the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress because police lacked probable cause to arrest him; (3) ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because trial counsel failed to request a jury instruction on illegally obtained evidence; and (4) the prosecutor mislead the jury during voir dire regarding whether the alleged contraband was tested before charges were filed. We have reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and the pro se response. See generally Bledsoe v. State, PD-300-04 (Tex.Crim.App. Nov. 16, 2005). 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.