From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Aug 10, 2017
No. 05-16-00823-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 10, 2017)

Opinion

No. 05-16-00823-CR No. 05-16-00824-CR

08-10-2017

CORIN ROBINSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F15-75527-H , F16-00440-H

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Wright, Justice Myers, and Justice Brown
Opinion by Chief Justice Wright

On the Court's own motion, we withdraw our opinion dated July 21, 2017 and vacate the judgment of that same date. This is now the opinion of the Court.

Corin Deon Robinson appeals his convictions for two aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon offenses. Appellant initially pleaded not guilty before a jury. While the jury deliberated during the guilt/innocence phase of the trial, appellant changed his pleas to guilty and pleaded true to one enhancement paragraph included in each indictment in exchange for the trial court capping the punishment at no more than twenty-five years in prison. At the end of the punishment phase, the trial court found appellant guilty and assessed punishment at twenty years' imprisonment in each case. On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel).

Appellant filed a pro se response raising several issues. After reviewing counsel's brief, appellant's pro se response, and the record, we agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court's duty in Anders cases). We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.

We affirm the trial court's judgments.

/Carolyn Wright/

CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
160823F.U05

JUDGMENT

CORIN DEON ROBINSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F15-75527-H.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Myers and Brown participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered August 10, 2017.

JUDGMENT

CORIN DEON ROBINSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F16-00440-H.
Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Myers and Brown participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered August 10, 2017.


Summaries of

Robinson v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Aug 10, 2017
No. 05-16-00823-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 10, 2017)
Case details for

Robinson v. State

Case Details

Full title:CORIN ROBINSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Aug 10, 2017

Citations

No. 05-16-00823-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 10, 2017)