Opinion
NO. 01-19-00052-CR
04-30-2020
FRANK GENE MORGAN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 405th District Court Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 17-CR-2977
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Frank Gene Morgan, pleaded guilty, with an agreed recommendation from the State, to the offense of possession of a controlled substance, a third-degree felony. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 481.115(c). The trial court found sufficient evidence to find appellant guilty, but deferred making any finding regarding appellant's guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for a period of four years. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 42A.101. The State then filed a motion to adjudicate appellant's guilt alleging multiple violations. See id. art. 42A.108. Appellant pleaded not true to the alleged violations. After a hearing, the trial court found that appellant committed violations of his community supervision, adjudicated appellant guilty, and sentenced appellant to seven years in prison. See id.; TEX. PENAL CODE § 12.34(a). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant's appointed counsel on appeal has 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. 386 U.S. 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 he 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.).
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 review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); 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 Zachary S. Maloney must immediately send appellant 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).
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Kelly and Goodman. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).