Caleb Peter Hobart v. the State of Texas
This text of Caleb Peter Hobart v. the State of Texas (Caleb Peter Hobart 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 TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-23-00060-CR
CALEB PETER HOBART, Appellant v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the County Court at Law No. 1 Ellis County, Texas Trial Court No. 2210182
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Caleb Peter Hobart was convicted of Driving While Intoxicated, a Class A
misdemeanor, and sentenced to 365 days in jail. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Hobart’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in
support of the motion asserting that he diligently reviewed the appellate record and that,
in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396,
18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record
for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders, 386 U.S. at
744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436
S.W.3d 313, 319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2008).
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all the
proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988); accord Stafford v.
State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or
"without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486
U.S. 429, 439 n. 10, 108 S. Ct. 1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988). After a review of the entire
record in this appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe
v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial
court's judgment.
Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Hobart is granted.
TOM GRAY Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed November 30, 2023 Do not publish [CR25]
Hobart v. State Page 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Caleb Peter Hobart v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caleb-peter-hobart-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.