Courtney Dran Sargent v. State ( 2018 )

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 22, 2018.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-17-00309-CR
NO. 14-17-00311-CR
COURTNEY DRAN SARGENT, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 212th District Court
Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 16CR0338 & 16CR0339
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery. Appellant’s
appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly
frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by assigning issues that might arguably support the
appeal, and explaining why those issues do not raise arguable error. See Gainous v.
State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969.]
A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60
days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error
in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief
or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for
review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jamison, Wise, and Jewell.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2