From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pham v. State

State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
Apr 9, 2015
NO. 14-14-00349-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 9, 2015)

Opinion

NO. 14-14-00349-CR

04-09-2015

THOMAS TRANH PHAM, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1358958

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted appellant of aggravated assault of a family member with a deadly weapon. On April 4, 2014, pursuant to an agreement with the State on punishment, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for eight years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a $500 fine. The trial court suspended the sentence and placed appellant on community supervision for eight years. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Counsel has complied with the Anders procedures set out in Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant was advised of the deadline to file any pro se response to counsel's brief. As of this date, more than sixty days have passed since the deadline and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We need not address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby. Do Not Publish—Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).


Summaries of

Pham v. State

State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals
Apr 9, 2015
NO. 14-14-00349-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 9, 2015)
Case details for

Pham v. State

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS TRANH PHAM, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:State of Texas in the Fourteenth Court of Appeals

Date published: Apr 9, 2015

Citations

NO. 14-14-00349-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 9, 2015)