Opinion
NO. 14-16-00478-CR NO. 14-16-00479-CR
10-19-2017
MIGUEL ANGEL SAENZ, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 405th District Court Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 14-CR-3080 & 14-CR-3117
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant entered a pleas of guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery. After a punishment hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 40 years on one offense, and 30 years on the other offense with the sentences to run concurrently. Appellant appealed.
Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), 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). At appellant's request, the record was provided to him. On May 26, 2017, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel's brief.
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's response, and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. We are not to 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 judgments of the trial court are affirmed.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jewell.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).