Kenneth Burnett v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 10, 2020
• Docket: 14-19-00746-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 10, 2020

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00746-CR

KENNETH BURNETT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1577564

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kenneth Burnett appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03(a)(2). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is 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 his right to inspect the appellate record and file a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the appeal is 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 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, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Spain, Hassan, and Poissant.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).