Grant Patrick Ledbetter v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-22-00178-CR
No. 02-22-00179-CR
___________________________
GRANT PATRICK LEDBETTER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 371st District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 1688753D, 1728881D
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Grant Patrick Ledbetter appeals the trial court’s judgments for the
offenses of assault of a peace officer and harassment of a public servant. See Tex.
Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.01(a), (b-2), 22.11. Appellant was on deferred-adjudication
community supervision for the assault when he committed the harassment offense.
The State filed a petition to adjudicate him guilty in the assault case and obtained a
grand-jury indictment for the harassment in a separate cause number. Without the
benefit of a plea bargain, appellant pleaded true to the allegation in the State’s petition
to adjudicate as well as guilty to the harassment offense. After a single hearing for
both offenses,1 the trial court assessed appellant’s punishment at 8 years’ confinement
for both offenses and ordered the sentences to run concurrently.2
Upon reviewing the records and concluding that no arguable grounds for
appeal exist, appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. See Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Counsel’s brief and motion meet the
requirements of Anders; counsel has presented a professional evaluation of the entire
record in each case demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. Id.,At the same hearing, appellant also pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor DWI. See
1
Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.04(a), (d). He has not appealed that conviction.
2
The trial court assessed no fines, and the judgments do not impose any costs
or fees.
2
87 S. Ct. at 1400. We have independently examined the records, as is our duty upon
the filing of an Anders brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.);
see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988). Appellant did
not respond to our letter giving him the opportunity to file a pro se response. The
State agreed with appointed appellate counsel’s assessment that no meritorious
grounds for appeal exist and declined to file a brief.
After carefully reviewing the records and counsel’s brief, we agree with counsel
that these appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Our independent review of
the records reveals nothing further that might arguably support the appeals. See
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State,
206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/s/ Bonnie Sudderth
Bonnie Sudderth
Chief Justice
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: March 23, 2023
3