Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number No. 01-01-00712-CR. See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. RENITA BALDWIN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. OPINION PER CURIAM After the trial court denied her motion to suppress evidence, appellant, Renita Baldwin, pleaded guilty, without an agreed recommendation as to punishment, to possession with intent to deliver cocaine weighing at least 400 grams. After a presentence investigation was completed, the trial court assessed punishment at 15 years' confinement. Counsel has filed a brief stating his opinion that the appeal is frivolous. The brief meets the minimum requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and stating why there are no arguable grounds of error on appeal. See Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex.Crim. App. 1969). Counsel certifies that the brief was delivered to appellant and that he advised appellant of her right to file a pro se response. No pro se response has been filed. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. In light of our opinion this date in Wilson v. State, No. 01-01-00713-CR (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] December 31, 2002, n.p.h.), we agree that there are no arguable grounds for appeal. We affirm the judgment. Counsel has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and also to inform appellant that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997).