From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Byrd v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Eleventh District
May 12, 2022
No. 11-21-00127-CR (Tex. App. May. 12, 2022)

Opinion

11-21-00127-CR

05-12-2022

RANDY BYRD, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


Do not publish.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

On Appeal from the 70th District Court Ector County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. A-19-1270-CR

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Randy Byrd, Appellant, pled guilty to the offense of felony driving while intoxicated and true to both enhancement allegations. As instructed, the jury found Appellant guilty and found the enhancement allegations to be true. The jury assessed punishment at confinement for life, and the trial court sentenced him accordingly. We affirm.

Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed in this court a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of both the reporter's record and the clerk's record. Counsel advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel's brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

Appellant has not filed a response to counsel's Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

We grant counsel's motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.


Summaries of

Byrd v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Eleventh District
May 12, 2022
No. 11-21-00127-CR (Tex. App. May. 12, 2022)
Case details for

Byrd v. State

Case Details

Full title:RANDY BYRD, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Eleventh District

Date published: May 12, 2022

Citations

No. 11-21-00127-CR (Tex. App. May. 12, 2022)