From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rogers v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jun 13, 2018
No. 04-17-00182-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 13, 2018)

Opinion

No. 04-17-00182-CR

06-13-2018

Darnell ROGERS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee


MEMORANDUM OPINION

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2015CR12728
Honorable Kevin M. O'Connell, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Irene Rios, Justice AFFIRMED

On February 22, 2017, Appellant Darnell Rogers was found guilty by a Bexar County Jury of one count of aggravated assault against a public servant, and subsequently assessed punishment at thirty-two years confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. This appeal ensued.

COURT-APPOINTED APPELLATE COUNSEL'S ANDERS BRIEF

Rogers's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); counsel also filed a motion to withdraw. In appellate counsel's brief, he recites the relevant facts with citations to the record, analyzes the record with respect to allegations and the evidence presented at trial, and accompanies the analysis with relevant legal authorities. Counsel concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.).

We conclude the brief meets the Anders requirements. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel provided Rogers with copies of the briefs and counsel's motion to withdraw, and informed Rogers of his right to review the record and file a pro se brief. See Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 85-86; see also Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). This court also advised Rogers of his right to request a copy of the record and file a brief. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). No additional briefing was filed in this court.

CONCLUSION

Having reviewed the entire record and court-appointed counsel's Anders brief, we agree with Rogers' court-appointed appellate counsel that there are no arguable grounds for appeal and the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We affirm the trial court's judgment and grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw. See Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 85-86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Rogers wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or he must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either (1) this opinion or (2) the last timely motion for rehearing or motion for en banc reconsideration is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Id. R. 68.3(a). Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Id. R. 68.4.

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH


Summaries of

Rogers v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Jun 13, 2018
No. 04-17-00182-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 13, 2018)
Case details for

Rogers v. State

Case Details

Full title:Darnell ROGERS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Jun 13, 2018

Citations

No. 04-17-00182-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 13, 2018)