Elic Milton Lyman Senior v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 21, 2021
Docket14-19-00352-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Elic Milton Lyman Senior v. the State of Texas (Elic Milton Lyman Senior 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.

Bluebook
Elic Milton Lyman Senior v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 21, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00352-CR

ELIC MILTON LYMAN, SR., Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 239th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 83696-CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals his conviction for four counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly 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 the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). On June 1, 2021, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.

We have reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se response and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. 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).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Hassan and Poissant. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Bledsoe v. State
178 S.W.3d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Elic Milton Lyman Senior v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elic-milton-lyman-senior-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.