RABE v. STATE

Full title: DWIGHT RABE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, Houston

Date published: Mar 5, 2009

No. 01-08-00271-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 5, 2009)

Opinion

No. 01-08-00271-CR

Opinion issued March 5, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

On Appeal from the 82nd District Court Robertson County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 07-04-18268-CR.

Panel consists of Chief Justice RADACK and Justices ALCALA and HANKS.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

SHERRY RADACK, Chief Justice.

A jury convicted appellant, Dwight Rabe, of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon¹ and assessed punishment at 10 years' confinement, suspended for 10 years' community supervision. The jury also assessed a $10,000 fine, which was not suspended. We affirm. Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id.; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978). The brief also reflects that counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). Counsel also informed appellant of his right to file a pro se response, which appellant has done. In his pro se response, appellant contends that (1) the trial court failed to "recognize [appellant's] right under the Vienna Convention to separate [his] property from the State of Texas and the United States of America . . .," (2) the Sheriff, who was the victim of the crime, acted in retaliation; (3) evidence was improperly admitted; (4) appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel because of counsel's failure and/or refusal to call or question certain witnesses; and (4) the trial court failed "to recognize that the Texas Ranger who investigated the actions of the parties involved was not unbiest [sic] and was only rubber stamping of the Sheriff's and his department's actions." Having reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's pro se brief, we agree with counsel's evaluation that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005).

1 See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02(a)(2), (b)(2)(B) (Vernon Supp. 2008).

Conclusion

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.² We grant counsel's motion to withdraw and overrule any other pending motions. Appointed counsel must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court.