David Dewayne Garrett v. State

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-18-00190-CR __________________

DAVID DEWAYNE GARRETT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 128th District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. A170319-R __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant David Dewayne Garrett 1 guilty of burglary of a

habitation and assessed punishment as a previous felony offender at fifty-five years

of imprisonment and a $7500 fine. Garrett’s appellate counsel filed a brief that

presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is

1 Although not an arguable issue, we note that appellant’s middle name is misspelled in the indictment and the trial court’s judgment. 1 frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d

807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

On November 19, 2018, we granted an extension of time for Garrett to file a

pro se brief. Garrett filed a pro se brief in response. The Court of Criminal Appeals

has held that we need not address the merits of issues raised in an Anders brief or a

pro se response. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Rather, an appellate court may determine: (1) “that the appeal is wholly frivolous

and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no

reversible error[;]” or (2) “that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the

cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id.

We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion

that no arguable issues support an appeal. See id. Therefore, we find it unnecessary

to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813

S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 2

AFFIRMED.

______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice

2 Garrett may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2 Submitted on June 6, 2019 Opinion Delivered August 7, 2019 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.