Gabriel Nassir Turner v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-22-00191-CR
NO. 03-22-00192-CR
Gabriel Nassir Turner, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
NOS. 20-1946-K277 & 20-0663-K277
THE HONORABLE STACEY MATHEWS, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Gabriel Nassir Turner was charged with two counts of aggravated
robbery with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code § 29.03. Appellant entered an open plea of
“guilty” and judicially confessed to both counts. Following a punishment hearing, appellant was
sentenced to twenty years’ confinement for each count, with the sentences to run concurrently.
In each cause, appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to
withdraw, supported by a brief concluding that the appeals are 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 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 she has provided copies of
the motions and brief to appellant; advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record
and file a pro se response; 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. To date, no pro se brief has been filed.
We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the Anders
brief submitted on appellant’s behalf, 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 Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly
Affirmed
Filed: October 20, 2022
Do Not Publish
2