Dalphines Chidiebere v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-23-00286-CR
___________________________
DALPHINES CHIDIEBERE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 1
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1747260
Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Wallach, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Dalphines Chidiebere pled guilty without a plea bargain to two
counts of indecency with a child by contact. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11(a)(1),
(c), (d). After ordering and reviewing a presentence investigation report, the trial court
convicted Chidiebere of both second-degree felonies; sentenced him to five years’
confinement on each, well within the punishment range; and ordered that the
sentences run concurrently. See id. §§ 3.03(b)(2)(a), 12.33(a), 21.11(d). Chidiebere
timely appealed.
Chidiebere’s appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief
complying with Anders v. California, representing that the appeal is frivolous. 386 U.S.
738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Counsel’s brief and motion meet the
requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and by
demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. See id.; In re Schulman, 252
S.W.3d 403, 406–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding). This court gave
Chidiebere the opportunity to file a pro se response to the Anders brief, but he did not
do so; likewise, the State did not file a brief.
After an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the
ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we must
independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on the
appellant’s behalf. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
2
Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,
82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the
record before us that arguably might support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685
n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We therefore grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and
affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/s/ Mike Wallach
Mike Wallach
Justice
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: July 25, 2024
3