Dell Everette Burkeen II v. State

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-19-00004-CR
___________________________
DELL EVERETTE BURKEEN II, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 355th District Court
Hood County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR13787
Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury found Appellant Dell Everett Burkeen II guilty of possession of 4 grams
or more but less than 200 grams of methamphetamine with intent to deliver. See Tex.
Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112(a), (d). In accordance with the jury’s
assessment, the trial court sentenced Burkeen to twenty-five years’ confinement and
ordered him to pay a $2,500 fine.
Burkeen’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as
counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the
requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the
record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. See 386 U.S. 738,
744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). In compliance with Kelly v. State, counsel notified
Burkeen of the motion to withdraw, provided him a copy of the brief, informed him
of his right to file a pro se response, informed him of his pro se right to seek
discretionary review should this court hold that the appeal is frivolous, and took
concrete measures to facilitate Burkeen’s review of the appellate record. 436 S.W.3d
313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Burkeen had the opportunity to file a pro se
response to the Anders brief but has not done so.
As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the
record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is
frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v.
State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may we
2
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 that arguably might support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,
827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw
and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: November 27, 2019
3