From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Apr 21, 2020
NO. 03-19-00747-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2020)

Opinion

NO. 03-19-00747-CR

04-21-2020

Donald Kenneth Mitchell, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee


FROM THE 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
NO. 77434 , THE HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Donald Kenneth Mitchell was indicted and pled guilty to the second-degree felony of sexual assault of a child, involving oral sex with fifteen-year-old M.R., and the district court sentenced Mitchell to fourteen years' imprisonment. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.011. Mitchell appealed his conviction.

Mitchell's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Mitchell's counsel states that he has provided Mitchell with copies of the motion to withdraw and brief, advised him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief, and provided him with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with this Court's mailing address. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). One month after this case was submitted, we granted Mitchell an additional sixty-day extension of time to file a pro se brief, due April 3, 2020. No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

/s/_________

Jeff Rose, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Baker and Triana Affirmed Filed: April 21, 2020 Do Not Publish


Summaries of

Mitchell v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
Apr 21, 2020
NO. 03-19-00747-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2020)
Case details for

Mitchell v. State

Case Details

Full title:Donald Kenneth Mitchell, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: Apr 21, 2020

Citations

NO. 03-19-00747-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2020)