Opinion
01-23-00328-CR
08-06-2024
ANSELMO MONTES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Do not publish. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 248th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1620203.
Panel consists of Landau, Countiss, and Guerra, Justices.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
Appellant, Anselmo Montes, was indicted for the first-degree felony offense of murder. A jury found Montes guilty and sentenced him to eight years' confinement in the Correctional Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
On appeal, Montes's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, along with a brief, stating that the record presents no reversible error, and the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Counsel's brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal authority. Id. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
Counsel advised Montes of his right to access the record and provided him with a form motion for access to the record. Counsel further advised Montes of his right to file a pro se response to the Anders brief. Montes was granted access to the appellate record. Montes filed a pro se response.
We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing that reviewing court-and not counsel-determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for reversal on appeal exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (reviewing court determines whether appeal is wholly frivolous or arguable grounds for appeal exist); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Attorney Thomas A. Martin must immediately send Montes the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.5(c).
Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).