Quang Van Mai v. State

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 17, 2020

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00114-CR NO. 14-19-00115-CR

QUANG VAN MAI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 405th District Court Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 18-CR-0193 & 18-CR-0257

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. 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

2

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). As of this date, more than 60 days have passed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief 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 Bourliot, Hassan and Poissant. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).