Opinion
NO. 02-17-00005-CR
04-26-2018
JONATHAN PRICE LARSEN, II APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
FROM THE 43RD DISTRICT COURT OF PARKER COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. CR16-0305 MEMORANDUM OPINION
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
Appellant Jonathan Price Larsen, II appeals his state-jail-felony conviction for theft. A grand jury indicted Larsen for theft of between $1,500 and $20,000. He received appointed counsel and pleaded guilty while waiving constitutional and statutory rights and while entering a judicial confession. After the trial court received evidence and arguments on the issue of his punishment, the court sentenced him to twenty-four months' confinement. He brought this appeal.
See Act of May 29, 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., ch. 1234, § 21, 2011 Tex. Gen. Laws 3301, 3309 (amended 2015) (current version at Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03 (West Supp. 2017)).
On the record, Larsen averred that his guilty plea was voluntary and that he was satisfied with his counsel's representation.
Larsen's appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief under Anders v. California, representing that "this case presents no non-frivolous basis for appeal." 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. See id.; In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406-12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (analyzing the effect of Anders). We gave Larsen an opportunity to file a pro se response to counsel's brief, but he did not. The State has not filed a brief.
Once an appellant's court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we must independently examine the record. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). 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 the record and counsel's brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably 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.
/s/ Wade Birdwell
WADE BIRDWELL
JUSTICE PANEL: SUDDERTH, C.J.; WALKER and BIRDWELL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: April 26, 2018