Bobby Mitchell v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-23-00314-CR
NO. 03-23-00315-CR
Bobby Mitchell, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 21ST DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, NOS. 17,530 & 17,531
THE HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER DARROW DUGGAN, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Bobby Mitchell was convicted after pleading guilty to the offenses of assault of a
family member while having a previous conviction, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon,
and forgery. Tex. Penal Code §§ 22.01, .02 (assault offenses) (appellate cause No. 03-23-00314-
CR), 31.21 (forgery) (appellate cause No. 03-23-00315-CR). The court assessed punishment at
six years in prison for each offense with all three sentences to be served concurrently with credit
for time served.
Mitchell’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw
supported by an Anders brief for both appeals contending that these appeals are frivolous and
without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Mitchell’s court-
appointed attorney’s brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.
See id.; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio,
488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of “assisting the court in
determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case and that
the appeal is . . . frivolous”). Mitchell’s counsel has represented to the Court that he provided
copies of the motion and brief to Mitchell and advised Mitchell of his right to examine the
appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of
the appeals in this Court. He also provided to Mitchell a Motion for Pro Se Access to the
Appellate Record lacking only Mitchell’s signature and the date and provided the mailing
address for this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
Thereafter, Mitchell filed a motion to dismiss his appointed counsel and to have new counsel
appointed. He also requested a copy of the record. Mitchell’s motion for a second appointed
appellate counsel was denied. The trial court clerk informed this Court by letter that the record
was sent to Mitchell. Mitchell has not filed a pro se brief nor a motion for extension of time to
file a brief.
We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might
arguably support the appeals. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We
agree with counsel that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We affirm the trial court’s
judgments and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw in both appeals.
__________________________________________
Darlene Byrne, Chief Justice
2
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis
Affirmed
Filed: July 24, 2024
Do Not Publish
3