Kristoffer Lance Rhyne v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 14, 2020
Docket10-19-00433-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Kristoffer Lance Rhyne v. State (Kristoffer Lance Rhyne 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.

Bluebook
Kristoffer Lance Rhyne v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00433-CR

KRISTOFFER LANCE RHYNE, Appellant v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 440th District Court Coryell County, Texas Trial Court No. 18-25202

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kristoffer Lance Rhyne was convicted of Aggravated Assault with a deadly

weapon and sentenced to 12 years in prison. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Rhyne's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in

support of the motion asserting that counsel has diligently reviewed the appellate record

and that, in counsel’s 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 the brief and other documents sent to us by counsel evidence 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.

Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Rhyne is granted.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Neill Affirmed Motion granted Opinion delivered and filed October 14, 2020 Do not publish [CR25]

Rhyne v. State Page 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District 1
486 U.S. 429 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
In Re Schulman
252 S.W.3d 403 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Bledsoe v. State
178 S.W.3d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Kelly, Sylvester
436 S.W.3d 313 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kristoffer Lance Rhyne v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kristoffer-lance-rhyne-v-state-texapp-2020.