EBONY JEANNE WOODS v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2010)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Bridges

After hearing appellant's three cases together, the trial court convicted Ebony Jeanne Woods in each case of endangering a child.   See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.041 (Vernon Supp.2009).   On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which she 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.   Appellant filed a pro se response raising several issues.   However, a court of appeals is not required to address the merits of claims raised in a pro se response.   See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).   Rather, the Court's duty is to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues, and, if so, to remand the case to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to address those issues.  Id.

After reviewing counsel's brief and the records before us, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit.   We find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeal.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE