Jacobi Boutte v. State

Opinion issued May 12, 2011

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-10-00461-CR

———————————

Jacobi Boutte, Appellant

V.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1215231

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jacobi Boutte appeals a judgment convicting him of the felony offense of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 29.02–.03 (West 2003).  The trial court assessed punishment at 20 years’ confinement.  Boutte’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in which he states that no valid grounds for appeal exist and that any appeal would be frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Boutte filed no response.  We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

The brief submitted by Boutte’s court-appointed counsel states his professional opinion that there are no arguable grounds for reversal on appeal and that any appeal would, therefore, lack merit.  See id.  Counsel’s brief meets the 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.; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406–07 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

          When we receive an Anders brief from a court-appointed attorney who asserts that no arguable grounds for appeal exist, we must determine that issue independently by conducting our own review of the entire record.  See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court, and not counsel, determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether case is “wholly frivolous”); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  In conducting our review, we consider any pro se response that the defendant files to his appointed counsel’s Anders brief.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 

           In accordance with Anders and Bledsoe, we have reviewed the record and the Anders brief from Boutte’s appointed counsel.  We conclude that there are no arguable grounds for reversal on appeal.

Conclusion

          We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw.[1]

                                                                   Harvey Brown

                                                                   Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, Justice Sharp, and Justice Brown.

Do not publish.   Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

---

[1]           Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform Boutte of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 & n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771–72 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).