April Dawn Hayes AKA April Dawn Solis v. State ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                    In the
    Court of Appeals
    Second Appellate District of Texas
    at Fort Worth
    ___________________________
    No. 02-19-00365-CR
    ___________________________
    APRIL DAWN HAYES AKA APRIL DAWN SOLIS, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS
    On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 3
    Tarrant County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 1522504D
    Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Womack, JJ.
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant April Dawn Hayes (a/k/a April Dawn Solis) has appealed her state-
    jail-felony conviction for child endangerment and resulting two-year sentence. See
    
    Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.041
    . On February 24, 2020, her court-appointed appellate
    counsel filed a brief asserting that her appeal is frivolous and a motion seeking to
    withdraw from his representation of Hayes. See Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 744–
    45, 
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    , 1400 (1967). The brief and motion meet the Anders requirements
    by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are
    no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See In re Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d 403
    ,
    406–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding). Hayes filed a response to her
    counsel’s Anders brief, but it provides no arguable grounds for appeal. The State also
    filed a response, agreeing with Hayes’s counsel’s assessment.
    When an Anders brief is filed, we must independently examine the appellate
    record to determine if any arguable grounds for appeal exist.         Stafford v. State,
    
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We also consider the Anders brief and
    any pro se response. Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d at
    408–09.
    We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief, the appellate record, and Hayes’s
    response. Finding no reversible error, we agree with counsel that this appeal is
    without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
    We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
    2
    /s/ Dana Womack
    Dana Womack
    Justice
    Do Not Publish
    Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
    Delivered: April 8, 2021
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-19-00365-CR

Filed Date: 4/8/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/12/2021