From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Palafox v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Aug 29, 2024
No. 02-24-00054-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2024)

Opinion

02-24-00054-CR

08-29-2024

Bradley Palafox, 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Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)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. CR15564

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Bassel and Walker, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

DABNEY BASSEL JUSTICE

The trial court adjudicated Bradley Palafox guilty of indecency with a child, assessed his punishment at twenty years' confinement, and sentenced him accordingly. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11(a)(1). Palafox appealed.

Palafox'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, this appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief professionally evaluates the appellate record and demonstrates why no arguable grounds for relief exist; the brief and withdrawal motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Counsel also complied with Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

Despite being provided a copy of the appellate record, Palafox declined to file a pro se response. Likewise, 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 his 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 appellate record. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the appellate record that otherwise 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

Palafox v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
Aug 29, 2024
No. 02-24-00054-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2024)
Case details for

Palafox v. State

Case Details

Full title:Bradley Palafox, Appellant v. The State of Texas

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

Date published: Aug 29, 2024

Citations

No. 02-24-00054-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 29, 2024)