Dylan James Laughrey v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 28, 2010
• Docket: 14-08-01142-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 28, 2010.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-08-01142-CR

DYLAN JAMES LAUGHREY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 239th District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 57,949

MEMORANDUM OPINION

            Appellant was indicted for the offense of capital murder and sentenced to confinement for life in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

            Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (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, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

            A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  Appellant received a copy of the record on November 16, 2009.  As of this date, more than thirty sixty days have elapsed since appellant received the record, and no pro se response has been filed.

            We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.  We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response 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 judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                                                        PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Seymore, and Brown.

Do Not Publish — Tex.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