From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re A.C.

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Apr 26, 2016
NO. 01-15-00931-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 26, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 01-15-00931-CVNO. 01-15-00932-CVNO. 01-15-00933-CV

04-26-2016

IN THE MATTER OF A.C., Appellant


On Appeal from the 315th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case Nos. 2015-01921J, 2015-02194J, 2015-02097J

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The State filed petitions alleging delinquent conduct against appellant, A.C., charging him with conduct in violation of (1) Texas Penal Code section 22.02, aggravated assault, in cause no. 2015-01921J; (2) Texas Penal Code, section 19.03, capital murder, in cause no. 2015-02194J; and (3) Texas Penal Code section 29.03, aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, in cause no. 2015-02097J. In each case, the State filed a motion requesting the juvenile court to waive its jurisdiction and transfer the case to criminal district court. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 54.02 (West 2014). After a hearing, the juvenile court signed orders waiving its jurisdiction. Appellant timely appealed these orders. See id. § 56.01(c)(1)(A) (West Supp. 2015).

See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02 (West 2011).

See id. § 19.03 (West Supp. 2015).

See id. § 29.03 (West 2011). --------

Appellant's appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he concludes that the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). The procedures set forth in Anders are applicable to an appeal from a juvenile court's order waiving jurisdiction and transferring the case to criminal district court. See In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 298-99 (Tex. 1998) (extending Anders procedures to juvenile proceedings based, in part, on quasi-criminal nature of proceedings); In re T.H., No. 14-15-00926-CV, 2016 WL 552187, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 11, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.) (citing In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d at 299) (applying Anders procedures to appeal of juvenile court order waiving jurisdiction). Counsel's brief meets the minimum Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and stating why there are no arguable grounds for reversal on appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400. Counsel has certified that he delivered a copy of the brief to appellant and his grandmother, and has informed them of appellant's right to file a response. See In re T.H., 2016 WL 552187, at *1. Additionally, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant and his grandmother of appellant's right to obtain a copy of the record and file a pro se response. Appellant has not filed a response.

When we receive an Anders brief from an appellant's appointed attorney who asserts that no arguable grounds for appeal exist, we must determine that issue independently by conducting our own review of the entire record. See In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d at 299. We have independently reviewed the entire record and counsel's Anders brief and agree with counsel's assessment that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

Accordingly, we affirm the orders of the trial court. In each appeal, we deny counsel's motion to withdraw. See In re P.M., No. 15-0171, 2016 WL 1274748, at *3 (Tex. Apr. 1, 2016).

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Bland, Brown, and Lloyd.


Summaries of

In re A.C.

Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas
Apr 26, 2016
NO. 01-15-00931-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 26, 2016)
Case details for

In re A.C.

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF A.C., Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas

Date published: Apr 26, 2016

Citations

NO. 01-15-00931-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 26, 2016)

Citing Cases

In re T.M.

See, e.g.,In re C.F. , No. 03-18-00008-CV, 2018 WL 2750007, at *2 (Tex. App.—Austin June 8, 2018, no pet.)…

In re K.A.E.

Thus, several Texas appellate courts have held this continued right to counsel applies equally in juvenile…