Opinion
NO. 03-14-00313-CR
03-31-2015
Kirt Allen Esthay a/k/a Kirt Allen Estay a/k/a Kirt Estay, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CONCHO COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. DAS-13-01849, THE HONORABLE GARLAND B. WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDINGMEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Kirt Allen Esthay a/k/a Kirt Allen Estay a/k/a Kirt Estay, was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.02. Pursuant to the habitual offender provision of the Penal Code, the trial court assessed appellant's punishment at confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for 25 years. See id. § 12.42(d).
Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988).
Appellant's counsel has certified to this Court that he sent copies of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response, and provided a motion to assist appellant in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Appellant requested access to the appellate record, and pursuant to this Court's order the clerk of the trial court provided written verification to this Court that the record was provided to appellant. See Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 321. Appellant requested two extensions of time to file a response, which this Court granted. After the deadline for appellant's response had passed, appellant filed a pro se brief, a supplemental pro se brief, and a pro se motion to supplement the brief containing additional arguments. In these briefs, appellant asserts that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, complains about prosecutorial misconduct, and argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial.
We have conducted an independent review of the record—including appellant's untimely pro se brief, supplemental brief, and motion to supplement—and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court's judgment of conviction is affirmed.
/s/_________
Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Goodwin and Bourland Affirmed Filed: March 31, 2015 Do Not Publish