Marcus Leshun Sargent v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 11, 2024
• Docket: 14-23-00079-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 11, 2024

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-23-00079-CR

MARCUS LESHUN SARGENT, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 506th District Court Grimes County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 18765

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child under six years old. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which counsel concludes the appeal is wholly 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 the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). On May 9, 2024, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se response and agree the appeal is wholly 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 or a pro se response 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 judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Wilson. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).