Joshua Shane Meadows v. State ( 2019 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-18-00796-CR
NO. 03-18-00808-CR
Joshua Shane Meadows, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 26TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
NOS. 16-3158-K26, 17-1500-K26, THE HONORABLE DONNA GAYLE KING, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Joshua Shane Meadows entered an open plea of guilty to one count of
possession of a controlled substance in an amount of more than one gram but less than four grams
and one count of evading arrest with a vehicle. The trial court found Meadows guilty of these
offenses and made a finding that Meadows used a deadly weapon in the commission of evading
arrest. The court sentenced Meadows to eight years’ imprisonment for possession of a controlled
substance and ten years’ imprisonment for evading arrest.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed motions to withdraw supported by
briefs concluding that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requirements
of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);
Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,
86–87 (1988).
Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he has provided copies of the
motions and briefs to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and
file a pro se brief; and provided appellant with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate
record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. Smith, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21
(Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. To date,
appellant has not filed a pro se response.
We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate
counsel’s briefs, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at
766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel
that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeals are frivolous.
Counsel’s motions to withdraw are granted. The trial court’s judgments of conviction
are affirmed.
____________________________________________
Chari L. Kelly, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Kelly and Smith
Affirmed
Filed: August 20, 2019
Do Not Publish
2