Angela L. Poteet v. the State of Texas
This text of Angela L. Poteet v. the State of Texas (Angela L. Poteet v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-24-00186-CR
ANGELA L. POTEET, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the 100th District Court Childress County, Texas Trial Court No. 6595, Honorable Dale A. Rabe, Jr., Presiding
December 17, 2024 ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.
Angela Poteet appealed her felony conviction for possessing a controlled
substance with intent to deliver and the resulting ten-year probated sentence. Her
appointed counsel filed an Anders 1 brief, representing that no arguable appellate issues
existed. So too did she move to withdraw. Finding at least one arguable issue, we grant
the motion to withdraw and remand the cause for the appointment of new counsel.
1 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). In her brief, appellate counsel discussed whether appellant’s sentence was
disproportionate to the gravity of the offense. No other matters were discussed, however.
Utilizing Anders “should be rare, given the plethora of actual issues normally
involved. Indeed, if there were issues worth trying, there are probably issues worth
appealing.” Davis v. State, 683 S.W.3d 828, 830 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2023) (order). An
“issue is frivolous or lacking merit when it has no basis in law or fact and ‘cannot
conceivably persuade the court.’” Id. Moreover, appellate counsel’s duty consists of
urging the arguable, irrespective of the likelihood of success. Id. With that in mind, our
review of the record identified at least two arguable issues pertaining to the sufficiency of
the evidence illustrating the requisite mens rea regarding possession and delivery of the
controlled substance. Consequently, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, abate the
proceeding, and remand the cause to the trial court.
On remand, the trial court shall, by written order, appoint new counsel to represent
appellant on appeal. The name, address, email address, telephone number, and State
Bar number of newly appointed counsel must be specified in the order. The trial court will
then cause its order to be filed in a supplemental clerk’s record with the clerk of this court
no later than January 3, 2025.
The deadline by which newly appointed counsel must file an appellant’s brief or
other brief addressing the aforementioned issues and any other arguable issues he or
she encounters is February 3, 2025, unless otherwise extended. Newly appointed
counsel may also request the supplementation of the appellate record as needed. Such
2 supplementation, if any, must be requested by written motion filed with the clerk of this
court before January 27, 2025. It is so ordered. 2
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
2 We make no comment upon the ultimate viability of the issues mentioned but only conclude they
necessitate development.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Angela L. Poteet v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/angela-l-poteet-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.