Michael Rashad Craig v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued January 13, 2015
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    NO. 01-14-00420-CR
    ____________
    MICHAEL RASHAD CRAIG, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 337th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 1333045
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant, Michael Rashad Craig, pled guilty to the offense of burglary of a
    habitation.   The court deferred adjudication in favor of five years’ community
    supervision. The State later moved for adjudication, and, following a hearing,
    Craig was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal
    Justice.
    Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw,
    along with an Anders brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and
    therefore the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    (1967).
    Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional
    evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal
    authority. See 
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 744
    , 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State,
    
    573 S.W.2d 807
    , 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has
    thoroughly reviewed the record and that she is unable to advance any grounds of
    error that warrant reversal. See 
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 744
    , 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell
    v. State, 
    193 S.W.3d 153
    , 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
    Counsel has informed us that he has delivered a copy of the brief to appellant
    and informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a response.
    See In re Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d 403
    , 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellant has
    not filed a response.
    We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we
    conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, that there are no arguable
    2
    grounds for review, and that therefore the appeal is frivolous. See 
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 744
    , 87 S. Ct. at 1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—
    determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly
    frivolous); Garner v. State, 
    300 S.W.3d 763
    , 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009)
    (explaining that frivolity is determined by considering whether there are “arguable
    grounds” for review); Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App.
    2005) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review exist);
    
    Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155
    (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds
    exist by reviewing entire record). An appellant may challenge a holding that there
    are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in
    the Court of Criminal Appeals. See 
    Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827
    & n.6.
    We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw.1    Attorney Jerome Godinich, Jr. must immediately send the notice
    required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice
    with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c).
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Brown.
    1
    Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal
    and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of
    Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 
    956 S.W.2d 25
    , 27 (Tex. Crim. App.
    1997).
    3
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    4