Alfred Lynn Gallander v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 18, 2015
• Docket: 09-14-00423-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

___________________

NO. 09-14-00423-CR ___________________

ALFRED LYNN GALLANDER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 253rd District Court Liberty County, Texas Trial Cause No. CR30821 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this appeal, Alfred Lynn Gallander’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief

contending no arguable grounds can be advanced to support reversing Gallander’s

felony conviction of burglary of a building. Based on our review of the record, we

agree with Gallander’s counsel that no arguable issues exist that would support a

decision to reverse the judgment being appealed. See Anders v. California, 386

U.S. 738 (1967).

1 A jury found Gallander guilty of burglary of a building, a state jail felony.

Following the punishment phase of Gallander’s trial, the jury determined that

Gallander should serve a two-year sentence and assessed a $5,000 fine. See Tex.

Penal Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(1), (c)(1) (West 2011). On appeal, Gallander’s counsel

filed a brief presenting counsel’s professional evaluation of the record; in the brief,

Gallander’s counsel concludes that any appeal would be frivolous. See Anders, 386

U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We granted an

extension of time to allow Gallander to file a pro se brief; however, Gallander has

not filed a response.

After reviewing the appellate record and the Anders brief filed by

Gallander’s counsel, we agree with counsel’s conclusion that any appeal would be

frivolous. Therefore, we need not order the appointment of new counsel to re-brief

Gallander’s appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App.

1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

AFFIRMED. ______________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on July 31, 2015 Opinion Delivered November 18, 2015 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

1 Gallander may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2