April Anne Wofford v. the State of Texas

Opinion filed July 17, 2025

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________

No. 11-24-00175-CR
__________

APRIL ANNE WOFFORD, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 104th District Court
Taylor County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 24303-B

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, April Anne Wofford, entered an open plea of guilty to possession
of methamphetamine in an amount of four grams or more but less than two-hundred
grams, a second-degree felony. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN.
§ 481.115(d) (West Supp. 2024). The trial court accepted Appellant’s guilty plea
and ordered a presentence investigation report to be prepared prior to the sentencing
hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court assessed Appellant’s
punishment at imprisonment for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, and a fine of $5,000.
Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this
court. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and
conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are
no arguable issues to present on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967). Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the
motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of the clerk’s record and
reporter’s record. Counsel also advised Appellant of her right to review the record
and file a response to counsel’s brief, and of her right to file a petition for
discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. As such, court-appointed counsel has
complied with the requirements of Anders, 386 U.S. 738; Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d
313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App.
2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Appellant has not filed a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following
the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed
the record and we agree that the appeal is without merit.1
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the
judgment of the trial court.

JOHN M. BAILEY
CHIEF JUSTICE

July 17, 2025
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

1
Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure.
2