Oscar Mireles v. State

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 16, 2019.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-18-00916-CR NO. 14-18-00917-CR

OSCAR MIRELES, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 187th District Court Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 2016CR3845 & 2016CR6142

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals his convictions for aggravated assault and possession of a controlled substance. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed briefs in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), 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). Copies of counsel’s briefs were 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 him. On April 12, 2019 and April 18, 2019, appellant filed pro se responses to counsel’s briefs.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s briefs, and appellant’s responses, and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the briefs would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. 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 judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

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 Do Not Publish — Tex.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