Zachary Alexander Woods v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-23-00434-CR
Zachary Alexander Woods, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY
NO. CR2022-095, THE HONORABLE DANIEL H. MILLS, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Zachary Alexander Woods was convicted by a jury of aggravated
kidnapping. See Tex. Penal Code § 20.04(a)(4)–(5). Appellant pleaded true to five prior felony
convictions, and, pursuant to the Penal Code’s habitual offender provision, the jury assessed his
punishment at life imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. See id. § 12.42(c)(1). The trial court
sentenced appellant to the assessed punishment.
Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by
a brief concluding that the appeal is 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, 81–82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has also forwarded to this Court a copy of a
letter that he sent to appellant, in which counsel asserted that he sent copies of the motion and
brief to appellant; informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se
response; and provided him with a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly
v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. To
date, no pro se response has been filed.
We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the record of
the trial and sentencing proceedings below and appellate counsel’s brief, 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 appeal is frivolous.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court’s judgment of
conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis
Affirmed
Filed: July 31, 2024
Do Not Publish
2