Opinion
No. 10-05-00037-CR
Opinion delivered and filed July 13, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 213th District Court, Tarrant County, Texas, Trial Court No. 0905514D. Affirmed.
Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice VANCE, and Justice REYNA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Meza pleaded guilty to knowingly causing bodily injury to a child and the trial court placed him on deferred-adjudication community supervision. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12, § 5 (Vernon Supp. 2004-2005); TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.04(a)(3), (f) (Vernon 2003). Meza pleaded true to the allegations in the State's motion to adjudicate guilt. The trial court adjudicated Meza guilty, revoked his community supervision, and sentenced him to imprisonment. Meza appeals. Meza's counsel filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). We affirm. The brief thoroughly reviews: (1) the absence of jurisdictional errors, (2) the absence of rulings on written pretrial motions, (3) the absence of the trial court's permission to appeal, (4) the judgment and pronouncement of sentence, and (5) the effective assistance of counsel. Counsel concludes that "there is no rational, reasonable, valid good faith point of error that could be raised on appeal." Although counsel informed Meza of the right to file a brief, Meza 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 Meza 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.).