Opinion
01-23-00441-CR
11-07-2024
ALBERT OUM NDJOCK, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Do not publish. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 458th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 21-DCR-096170
Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Hightower and Countiss.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JULIE COUNTISS JUSTICE
After appellant, Albert Oum Ndjock, without an agreed punishment recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of sexual assault of a child, the trial court assessed his punishment at confinement for fifteen years. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.011(a)(2), (c)(1), (f).
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 the Court with references to the record and legal authority. See 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 has informed the Court that he provided appellant with a copy of his Anders brief and his motion to withdraw. Counsel also informed appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a response to counsel's Anders brief. Further, counsel provided appellant with a form motion to access the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellant filed a response to his counsel's Anders brief.
This Court also notified appellant that his appointed counsel had filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw and informed appellant that he had a right to examine the appellate record and file a response to his counsel's Anders brief. And this Court provided appellant with a form motion to access the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-22 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
We have independently reviewed the entire record, 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 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 appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for an 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.
Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant appellant's appointed counsel's motion to withdraw. Attorney David Ryan 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). We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.
Appellant's appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of the appeal and that appellant 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).