From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Najera v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Jun 6, 2024
No. 02-23-00187-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 6, 2024)

Opinion

02-23-00187-CR

06-06-2024

Hayden Reid Najera, Appellant v. The State of Texas


Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)

On Appeal from the 355th District Court Hood County, Texas Trial Court No. CR15419

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Elizabeth Kerr Justice

The trial court found Appellant Hayden Reid Najera guilty of third-degree felony theft, sentenced him to 10 years' confinement, and ordered him to pay $10,000 in restitution to the complainant within 5 years of his release. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 12.34, 31.03(a), (e)(5); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.037.

Najera's court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion in which he avers that, in his professional opinion, the appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by professionally evaluating the appellate record and demonstrating why no arguable grounds for relief exist. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510-11 &n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Counsel also complied with Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

We gave Najera the opportunity to file a pro se response, but he has not done so. The State did not file a response.

After an appellant's court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills Anders's requirements, we must independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on the appellant's behalf. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511. 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 counsel's brief and the record. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that arguably might 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.


Summaries of

Najera v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Jun 6, 2024
No. 02-23-00187-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 6, 2024)
Case details for

Najera v. State

Case Details

Full title:Hayden Reid Najera, Appellant v. The State of Texas

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth

Date published: Jun 6, 2024

Citations

No. 02-23-00187-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 6, 2024)