Milton Earl Edgar, Jr. v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 8, 2018
• Docket: 01-17-00074-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued March 8, 2018

In The

C ourt of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-17-00074-CR ——————————— MILTON EARL EDGAR, JR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 230th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1410624

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Milton Earl Edgar, Jr., pleaded guilty to the first-degree felony

offense of aggravated sexual assault of a child under the age of 141 without an agreed

recommendation from the State concerning sentencing. The trial court sentenced

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.021(a)(1)(B)(iv). appellant to 35 years’ incarceration in the Institutional Division of the Texas

Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along

with a brief, stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is

without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct.

1396 (1967).

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional

evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal

authority. 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807,

812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the

record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Counsel advised appellant of his right to access the record and provided him

with a form motion for access to the record. Counsel further advised appellant of his

right to file a pro se response to the Anders brief. Appellant did not request access

to the record and did not file a pro se response.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds

for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400

2 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full

examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State,

300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine

whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–

27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court

determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that

an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal

by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.2 Attorney Brian M. Middleton must immediately send appellant the

required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX.

R. APP . P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Massengale and Brown. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP . P. 47.2(b).

2 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 3