Opinion
03-23-00434-CR
07-31-2024
Zachary Alexander Woods, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
Do Not Publish
FROM THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. CR2022-095, THE HONORABLE DANIEL H. MILLS, JUDGE PRESIDING
Before Chief Justice Byrne, Smith and Theofanis Justices.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice.
Appellant Zachary Alexander Woods was convicted by a jury of aggravated kidnapping. See Tex. Penal Code § 20.04(a)(4)-(5). Appellant pleaded true to five prior felony convictions, and, pursuant to the Penal Code's habitual offender provision, the jury assessed his punishment at life imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. See id. § 12.42(c)(1). The trial court sentenced appellant to the assessed punishment.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988). Appellant's counsel has also forwarded to this Court a copy of a letter that he sent to appellant, in which counsel asserted that he sent copies of the motion and brief to appellant; informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response; and provided him with a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. To date, no pro se response has been filed.
We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the record of the trial and sentencing proceedings below and appellate counsel's brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court's judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Affirmed