Opinion
02-23-00113-CR
07-11-2024
Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)
On Appeal from the 89th District Court Wichita County, Texas Trial Court No. DC89-CR2022-0593
Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Mike Wallach Justice
A jury convicted Appellant Willie Hernandez of assault of a public servant and assessed his punishment at 10 years' confinement. The trial court sentenced Hernandez accordingly. We affirm.
Hernandez's court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion, in which he avers that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by professionally evaluating the appellate record and demonstrating why no arguable grounds for relief exist. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Additionally, in compliance with Kelly v. State, counsel (1) notified Hernandez of his motion to withdraw; (2) provided him a copy of both the motion and the brief; (3) informed him of his right to file a pro se response; (4) informed him of his pro se right to seek discretionary review should this court hold the appeal frivolous; and (5) took concrete measures to facilitate his review of the appellate record. See 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Hernandez had the opportunity to file a response on his own behalf but declined to do so. Likewise, the State did not file a response to the Anders brief.
After an appellant's court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the Anders requirements, we must independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511. Only then may we grant counsel's motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed counsel's brief and the appellate record. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the appellate record that arguably might support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment.