Martrais Louis Strickland v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Nos. 04-23-00484-CR & 04-23-00485-CR
Martrais Louis STRICKLAND,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 2018-CR-4367 & 2018-CR-2012
Honorable Kristina Escalona, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Irene Rios, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: June 12, 2024
AFFIRMED; MOTIONS TO WITHDRAW GRANTED
On February 22, 2019, Martrais Louis Strickland pleaded nolo contendere to the offense
of continuous family violence and was sentenced to six years in prison. His sentence was
suspended, and he was placed on community supervision for six years. On the same day, Strickland
pleaded nolo contendere to the offense of evading arrest with a vehicle and was sentenced to six
years in prison. Again, his sentenced was suspended, and he was placed on community supervision
for six years. Thereafter, the State filed motions to revoke and supplemental motions to revoke in
each case. At a hearing, Strickland pleaded “true” to allegations that he had failed to report to his
community supervision officer for specific months in 2021, 2022, and 2023. The trial court
04-23-00484-CR & 04-23-00485-CR
revoked Strickland’s community supervision in each case, sentenced him to five years in prison
for each offense, and ordered the sentences to run concurrently. Strickland appealed.
In each appeal, Strickland’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a brief and a motion to
withdraw in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). With citations to the
record and legal authority, counsel’s briefs explain why no arguable points of error exist for review
and conclude that these appeals are frivolous and without merit. See id. at 744-45; High v. State,
573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel’s briefs satisfy the requirements of Anders. See
386 U.S. at 744-45; High, 573 S.W.2d at 812-13. Strickland was provided with copies of the
Anders briefs and was informed of his right to review the records and file his own briefs. See Kelly
v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Additionally, counsel advised Strickland
that if he wished to review the records, he needed to file motions in this court. Counsel provided
Strickland with form motions for this purpose. See id. However, Strickland never requested the
records or filed his own briefs.
We have reviewed counsel’s Anders briefs and the appellate records. We agree with
counsel that these appeals are frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s
judgments and grant counsel’s motions to withdraw. 1 See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86
(Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—
San Antonio 1996, no pet.).
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
DO NOT PUBLISH
1
No substitute counsel will be appointed. If Strickland would like to seek review by the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for
discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the later of (1) the
date of this opinion; or (2) the date the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P.
68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 68.4. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.
-2-