Michael Wayne Steen, II v. State ( 2014 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-14-00206-CR
Michael Wayne Steen, II, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 69660, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted appellant Michael Wayne Steen, II of unlawful possession
of a firearm by a convicted felon, a third-degree felony. See Tex. Penal Code § 46.04(a), (e).
Punishment was assessed at ten years’ imprisonment. See id. § 12.34 (punishment range for third-
degree felony is ten years maximum and two years minimum).
Steen’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets 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 (1988).
Appellant’s counsel has represented to the Court that he provided copies of the
motion and brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record, file a
pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following dismissal of this appeal as frivolous; 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. State, 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. No pro se brief or other written
response has been filed, including a motion for access to the appellate record.
We have reviewed the record, including appellate counsel’s brief, 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 appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to
withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
____________________________________________
J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin
Affirmed
Filed: December 11, 2014
Do Not Publish
2