Javonte Davis v. the State of Texas

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00348-CR

NO. 03-25-00349-CR

Javonte Davis, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 299TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NOS. D-1-DC-23-302250 & D-1-DC-23-302260, THE HONORABLE KAREN SAGE, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The State charged appellant Javonte Davis in separate indictments with two counts of second-degree aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.02(a)(2). The cases were consolidated for trial, and a jury found Davis guilty of both offenses. The jury assessed his punishments at fourteen years’ confinement in each case, and the trial court sentenced him to the assessed punishments, which the court ordered were to run concurrently. Davis appealed his convictions.

Davis’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw along with a brief concluding that the appeals are frivolous and that they present no arguably meritorious issues. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744

(1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988). Davis’s counsel has certified to this Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Davis, advised him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se response, and provided a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Davis did not file a pro se response.

We have conducted an independent review of the record—including the record of the trial proceedings and appellate counsel’s brief—and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and that the appeals are frivolous.

We affirm the judgments of conviction and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

__________________________________________

Maggie Ellis, Justice

Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Ellis Affirmed Filed: July 16, 2026 Do Not Publish