Darios Tramain Crayton-Scott v. State

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 16, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00194-CR NO. 14-18-00195-CR NO. 14-18-00196-CR NO. 14-18-00197-CR

DARIOS TRAMAIN CRAYTON-SCOTT, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 228th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 1484225, 1511723, 1511724, and 1511725

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Darios Tramain Crayton-Scott, appeals his convictions for aggravated assault and aggravated robbery. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 22.02(a)(1), (a)(2), 29.03(a)(2). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of his right to inspect the appellate records and file a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the records and counsel’s brief and agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the records. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the trial court’s judgments are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Bourliot, and Zimmerer

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).