Document Info

DocketNumber: 14-18-00979-CR

Filed Date: 7/25/2019

Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/25/2019

  • Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 25, 2019.
    In The
    Fourteenth Court of Appeals
    NO. 14-18-00979-CR
    MARSHALL SMITH, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 185th District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. 1582702
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant appeals his conviction for evading arrest or detention with a
    previous conviction. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she
    concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the
    requirements of Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), by assigning issues that
    might arguably support the appeal, and explaining why those issues do not raise
    arguable error. See Gainous v. State, 
    436 S.W.2d 137
    , 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969.
    A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
    of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
    v. State, 
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60
    days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.
    We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
    appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in
    the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief
    or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for
    review. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
    Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.
    Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
    2