In the Matter of D.S., a Juvenile v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed March 4, 2024
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-23-00479-CV
IN THE MATTER OF D.S., A JUVENILE
On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. JD-21-00797-X
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Goldstein
Opinion by Justice Goldstein
D.S. appeals the trial court’s order modifying his disposition. D.S. was
adjudicated delinquent on two aggravated robbery charges and was given a four-
year determinate sentence, probated for four years. The State later filed a motion to
modify that disposition alleging D.S. violated the terms of his probation, including
that he had committed an aggravated robbery. Following an evidentiary hearing, the
trial court modified D.S.’s disposition and committed appellant to the custody of the
Texas Juvenile Justice Department for a period of four years. D.S.’s court-
appointed counsel filed a notice of appeal on D.S.’s behalf and has since filed a brief,
stating that in his professional opinion the appeal is without merit and that there are
no arguable grounds for reversal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744
(1967).
Anders procedures are appropriate in appeals from juvenile delinquency
adjudications. See In Re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 226, 297 (Tex. 1998) (orig. proceeding)
(Because Anders protects juveniles’ statutory right to counsel on appeal, we hold the
procedures enumerated in Anders apply to juvenile appeals). An attorney has an
ethical obligation to refuse to prosecute a frivolous appeal. In re Schulman, 252
S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Under the Anders procedure, if appointed
counsel finds the appeal frivolous, counsel must file a brief explaining why the
appeal lacks merit. Anders, 386 U.S. 744-45; D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d at 297. A copy of
that brief must be provided to the juvenile’s parent or guardian. The juvenile thus
has the ability to advance his or her appeal through a parent, legal guardian, next
friend, or guardian ad litem. See D.A.S., 973 S.W. 2d at 297.
Here, D.S.’s counsel provided D.S.’s Mother with a copy of the Anders brief
and advised Mother of her right to examine the record and file her own response.
This Court separately provided Mother with a copy of the brief and notified her of
her right to examine the record and file a response. Mother has not responded.
In his brief, D.S.’s counsel demonstrated that he reviewed the record and
concluded the appeal was without merit and frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744.
He states that in his professional opinion no arguable grounds for reversal exist and
that any appeal would therefore lack merit. See id. Counsel’s brief meets the
–2–
minimum Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record
and stating why there are no arguable grounds for reversal on appeal. See id.;
Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.23. We have independently reviewed the record and
counsel’s brief and we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit.
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s modification order.
/Bonnie Lee Goldstein/
BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN
JUSTICE
230479F.P05
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
IN THE MATTER OF D.S., A On Appeal from the 305th Judicial
JUVENILE District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. JD-21-00797-
No. 05-23-00479-CV X.
Opinion delivered by Justice
Goldstein. Justices Molberg and
Pedersen, III participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s
modification order is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered March 4, 2024.
–4–