Kevin Howard v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 3, 2013
• Docket: 03-12-00272-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00272-CR

Kevin Howard, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 390TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-DC-10-207399, HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found appellant Kevin Howard guilty of two counts of aggravated robbery with

a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 29.02(a)(1)–(2), .03(a)(2). The jury assessed punishment

at sixty years’ imprisonment for each count.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a

brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. 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 Anders v. California, 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,

86–87 (1988).

Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine

the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at

766. We have not received a pro se brief from appellant. We have conducted an independent review of the record, including 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 the appeal is frivolous.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Goodwin and Field

Affirmed

Filed: July 3, 2013

Do Not Publish