From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wells v. State

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
Nov 30, 2017
NO. 02-17-00020-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 30, 2017)

Opinion

NO. 02-17-00020-CR

11-30-2017

JAMES EDWARD WELLS APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE


FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 1444613D MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury convicted Appellant James Edward Wells of aggravated sexual assault of a child under fourteen years of age and assessed his punishment at sixty years' confinement. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.32(a) (West 2011), § 22.021(a)(1)(B)(i), (2)(B), (e) (West Supp. 2017). The trial court sentenced him accordingly. Appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967); see In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406-12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding) (analyzing the effect of Anders). Although Appellant was given an opportunity to file a pro se response to the Anders brief, he has not done so, nor has the State filed a brief in response to the Anders brief.

After an appellant's court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court must independently examine the record to see if any arguable ground may be raised on his behalf. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We also consider the briefs and any pro se response. See Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408-09. Only after we conduct our own examination to determine whether counsel has correctly assessed the case may we grant his 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 record. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in the record that 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.

PER CURIAM PANEL: PITTMAN, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: November 30, 2017


Summaries of

Wells v. State

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
Nov 30, 2017
NO. 02-17-00020-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 30, 2017)
Case details for

Wells v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAMES EDWARD WELLS APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

Court:COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

Date published: Nov 30, 2017

Citations

NO. 02-17-00020-CR (Tex. App. Nov. 30, 2017)