Opinion
10-23-00035-CR
12-28-2023
MATTHEW JOE HERRERA, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Do not publish
From the 18th District Court Somervell County, Texas Trial Court No. 249-01088
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith, J.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
STEVE SMITH Justice.
A jury found appellant Matthew Joe Herrera guilty of one count of possession of a controlled substance in an amount greater than four grams but less than 200 grams with intent to deliver and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112; see also Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 46.04. The trial court sentenced Herrera accordingly. Herrera then filed the present appeal. We affirm.
Herrera's appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion asserting that she has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in her opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See generally Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record and compliance with other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407-09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must "after a full examination of all the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 349-50, 102 L.Ed.2d (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988). Although provided the opportunity, Herrera has not filed a response to the motion to withdraw or Anders brief. After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826=28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgments.
Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Herrera is granted.
Appeal affirmed; motion granted.