James Williams v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 24, 2012
• Docket: 14-11-00435-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 24, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-11-00435-CR NO. 14-11-00436-CR ____________

JAMES WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 1192161 & 1192162

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offenses of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and aggravated sexual assault, without an agreed recommendation on sentencing. On May 13, 2011, the trial court sentenced appellant in each case to confinement for twenty-five (25) years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which counsel concludes the appeal in each case is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement 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 (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 in each case and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed in either case.

We have carefully reviewed the record in each case and counsel's brief and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, in both cases 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).

Accordingly, in each case the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Jamison, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).