Antonio Anthony v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed June 13, 2023

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00778-CR

ANTONIO ANTHONY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F21-60313

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Nowell, Goldstein, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Nowell A jury convicted Antonio Anthony of aggravated assault with a deadly

weapon. Appellant’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief in which he

concluded the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit as well as a motion to

withdraw as appointed counsel.

When an appellate court receives an Anders brief asserting no arguable

grounds for appeal exist, we must determine that issue independently by conducting

our own review of the record. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967)

(emphasizing court, and not appointed counsel, determines whether case is “frivolous” after full examination of proceedings); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503,

510–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (quoting Anders). If we conclude, after conducting

an independent review, that “appellate counsel has exercised professional diligence

in assaying the record for error” and agree the appeal is frivolous, we should grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. Crowe v. State,

595 S.W.3d 317, 319 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2020, no pet.) (quoting Meza v. State, 206

S.W.3d 684, 689 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)).

The brief before us meets the requirements of Anders. It presents a

professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there were no arguable

grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel

Op.] 1978). Appellant was provided a complete record and advised of his rights to

file a pro se response; he did not file a response. We also have reviewed the record

and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App.

2005). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in

the record that might arguably support the appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/Erin A. Nowell// ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE

220778f.u05 Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

–2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

ANTONIO ANTHONY, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-22-00778-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F21-60313. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Breedlove participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 13th day of June, 2023.

–3–