Opinion
03-23-00747-CR
08-27-2024
Christian Lee Guzman, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
Do Not Publish
From the 207th District Court of Hays County No. CR-21-0323-B, the Honorable Tracie Wright-Reneau, Judge Presiding
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis
MEMORANDUM OPINION
EDWARD SMITH, JUSTICE
Christian Lee Guzman pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated robbery ("Count 1"), two counts of robbery ("Count 2" and "Count 3"), one count of endangering a child ("Count 4"), one count of attempted to escape while arrested or confined ("Count 5"), and one count of evading arrest with a motor vehicle ("Count 6") and was sentenced to life imprisonment in Count 1, twenty years' imprisonment in Counts 2 and 3, two years in jail in Counts 4 and 5, and ten years' imprisonment in Count 6. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 12.32-.35, 22.041, 29.02, .03, 38.04, .06. Guzman appeals his convictions.
Guzman's court-appointed attorney on appeal filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief contending that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Guzman's court-appointed attorney's brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id.; 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) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of "assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous"). Guzman's counsel represented to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Guzman; advised Guzman of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and provided Guzman with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Guzman has not filed a pro se brief challenging his conviction, and the deadline for filing a pro se brief has expired.
We have independently reviewed the record and considered appellate counsel's brief, and we have found nothing that might arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgments of conviction.
Affirmed.