Mary Frances McDonough v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 27, 2024
• Docket: 14-22-00926-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 27, 2024.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00926-CR NO. 14-22-00927-CR

MARY FRANCES MCDONOUGH, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 400th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 19-DCR-087857 & 19-DCR-087858

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals her convictions for money laundering and theft. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he 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). At appellant’s request, the record was provided to her. On November 27, 2023, 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).

The judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Wise and Jewell. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).