Joseph Bernard Cooper v. State
This text of Joseph Bernard Cooper v. State (Joseph Bernard Cooper v. State) 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.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________
NO. 09-14-00301-CR ____________________
JOSEPH BERNARD COOPER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ___________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 258th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. 23233 ___________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted Joseph Bernard Cooper of aggravated assault with a deadly
weapon and assault causing bodily injury. The trial court found that Cooper had
two prior felony convictions and sentenced Cooper to seventy-five years in prison
for aggravated assault and six months in county jail for misdemeanor assault, to
run concurrently. Cooper’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s
professional evaluation of the record and concludes Cooper’s appeal is frivolous.
1 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807
(Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Cooper filed a pro se brief in response.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has held that we need not address the
merits of issues raised in Anders briefs or pro se responses. Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, we may determine that: (1)
“the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed
the record and finds no reversible error”; or (2) “arguable grounds for appeal exist
and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to
brief the issues.” Id. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We
have independently examined the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we
agree that no arguable issues support the appeal. We find it unnecessary to order
appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813
S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1
AFFIRMED. ______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on July 21, 2015 Opinion Delivered August 12, 2015 Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ. 1 Cooper may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Joseph Bernard Cooper v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-bernard-cooper-v-state-texapp-2015.