Kenneth Maurice McDonald v. the State of Texas
This text of Kenneth Maurice McDonald v. the State of Texas (Kenneth Maurice McDonald v. the State of Texas) 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
Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas
10-25-00157-CR
Kenneth Maurice McDonald, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
On appeal from the 52nd District Court of Coryell County, Texas Judge Trent D. Farrell, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 24-28654
JUSTICE HARRIS delivered the opinion of the Court.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Kenneth Maurice McDonald pled guilty to and was convicted of burglary
of a building. He was placed on community supervision for five years. The
trial court revoked McDonald’s supervision after McDonald pled true to each
alleged community supervision violation and sentenced McDonald to 20
months in State Jail. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. McDonald’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders
brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the
appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Counsel's
brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance
with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has
performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders, 386 U.S. at
744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also Kelly
v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252
S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all
the proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders, 386
U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d
300 (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any
basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10, 108
S. Ct. 1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this
appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v.
State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm
the trial court's judgment.
McDonald v. State Page 2 Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of McDonald is
granted.
LEE HARRIS Justice
OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: November 13, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirmed Motion granted Do Not Publish CR25
McDonald v. State Page 3
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Kenneth Maurice McDonald v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kenneth-maurice-mcdonald-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.