Quincy Lamar Baker v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)
• Decided: April 2, 2026
• Docket: 10-25-00082-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-25-00082-CR

Quincy Lamar Baker, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On appeal from the 12th District Court of Walker County, Texas Judge David W. Moorman, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 30926

JUSTICE HARRIS delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Quincy Lamar Baker was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly

weapon, enhanced, and sentenced to 30 years in prison. We affirm the trial

court’s judgment.

Baker’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders

brief in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the

appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). Counsel's

brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance

with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has

performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders, 386 U.S. at

744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also Kelly

v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252

S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all

the proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders, 386

U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d

300 (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App.

1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or "without merit" when it "lacks any

basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n. 10, 108

S. Ct. 1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this

appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v.

State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm

the trial court's judgment.

Baker v. State Page 2 Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Baker is granted.

LEE HARRIS Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: April 2, 2026 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirmed Motion granted Do Not Publish CRPM

Baker v. State Page 3