LilJuan Richardson Lawrence v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 24, 2019
• Docket: 05-18-01100-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed; Opinion Filed May 24, 2019.

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-01100-CR No. 05-18-01101-CR No. 05-18-01102-CR LILJUAN RICHARDSON LAWRENCE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F17-29751-L, F17-29752-L, F17-29753-L

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Carlyle Appellant Liljuan Richardson Lawrence waived a jury and entered a guilty plea to one

charge of evading arrest or detention with a motor vehicle and two charges of abandoning a child

without intent to return. The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to ten years’

imprisonment in each case, to run concurrently.

On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly

frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), because it presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect,

there are no arguable grounds to advance.1 Counsel appears to have delivered a copy of the brief

1 See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not do so.2 We

have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief.3 We agree the appeals are frivolous and without

merit, finding nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.

We affirm the trial court’s judgments.

/Cory L. Carlyle/

CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 181100F.U05

2 See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief). 3 See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). –2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

LILJUAN RICHARDSON LAWRENCE, On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Appellant No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-29751-L. No. 05-18-01100-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Myers and Molberg participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 24th day of May, 2019.

–3– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

LILJUAN RICHARDSON LAWRENCE, On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Appellant No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-29752-L. No. 05-18-01101-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Myers and Molberg participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

–4– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

LILJUAN RICHARDSON LAWRENCE, On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Appellant No. 5, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-29753-L. No. 05-18-01102-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Myers and Molberg participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

–5–