Johnny Eugene Davis, Sr. v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 20, 2014
• Docket: 11-14-00112-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion filed November 20, 2014

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-14-00112-CR __________

JOHNNY EUGENE DAVIS, SR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pinto County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 15154

MEMORANDUM OPINION Johnny Eugene Davis, Sr., entered an open plea of guilty to the third-degree felony offense of injury to a child. The trial court accepted Appellant’s plea, convicted Appellant of the offense, and assessed Appellant’s punishment at confinement for eight years and a fine of $2,500. We dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this appeal. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are no arguable grounds to advance on appeal. Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the motion and a copy of the brief, and counsel has advised Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief.1 A response has not been filed.2 Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.— Eastland 2005, no pet.). Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit and should be dismissed. Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise Appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review by that court. TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4 (“In criminal cases, the attorney representing the defendant on appeal shall, within five days after the opinion is handed down, send his client a copy of the opinion and judgment, along with notification of the defendant’s right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review under Rule 68.”). Likewise, this court advises Appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 68.

1 Counsel has also provided Appellant with a copy of the record. 2 By letter, this court granted Appellant thirty days in which to exercise his right to file a response to counsel’s brief. The response, if any, was due for filing on or before August 27, 2014. Appellant filed a pro se motion for extension of time to file a pro se response. We granted the motion in part and ordered that the response was due for filing in our court on or before November 10, 2014. Appellant has not filed a response.

2 The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

November 20, 2014 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson, J., and Bailey, J.