Opinion
NO. 14-13-00963-CR
12-02-2014
GARRICK IAN HASTINGS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 208th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1403750
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted appellant of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The jury sentenced appellant to confinement for sixty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a fine of $10,000. Appellant filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by advancing frivolous contentions which arguably might support the appeal. See Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).
A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The record was provided to appellant and on November 4, 2014, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel's brief.
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's response, and agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Christopher and Busby.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).