Derrick Deon Ferguson v. State ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued January 23, 2014
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-12-01130-CR
    ———————————
    DERRICK DEON FERGUSON, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 23rd District Court
    Brazoria County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 61,854
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    A jury found appellant, Derrick Deon Ferguson, guilty of the offense of
    aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon.         See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §
    29.03(a)(2) (West 2011). The trial court found it true that appellant had previously
    been convicted of aggravated robbery and sentenced him to 30 years in prison. See
    
    Id. § 12.42(c).
    Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
    Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw,
    along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and 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. 386 U.S. at 744
    , 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    , 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).        Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly
    reviewed the record and he 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.).
    We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we
    conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds
    for review, and 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) (reviewing court must determine
    whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    ,
    2
    826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); 
    Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155
    (reviewing
    court determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We
    note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds
    for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas 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. *   Attorney Perry R. Stevens must immediately send appellant the
    required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX.
    R. APP. P. 6.5(c).
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Massengale.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    *
    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