Robert Brandon Guevara v. State
This text of Robert Brandon Guevara v. State (Robert Brandon Guevara v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-16-00016-CR
ROBERT BRANDON GUEVARA, Appellant v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 14-01404-CRF-85
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The jury convicted Robert Brandon Guevara of the offense of aggravated robbery.
The trial court assessed punishment at 27 years confinement. We affirm.
Guevara’s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief asserting that she has diligently
reviewed the appellate record and that, in her opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel informed Guevara of his right to submit a brief
on his own behalf. Guevara did not file a brief. Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error, and we conclude that counsel performed the duties
required of appointed counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also 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." See Anders v. California, 386
U.S. at; 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 (1988). After a review of the entire record in this
appeal, we determine 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.
Counsel's request that she be allowed to withdraw from representation of Guevara
is granted. Additionally, counsel must send Guevara a copy of our decision, notify
Guevara of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review, and send this Court
a letter certifying counsel's compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 48.4.
TEX.R.APP.P. 48.4; see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.22.
AL SCOGGINS Justice
Guevara v. State Page 2 Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed August 31, 2016 Do not publish [CRPM]
Guevara v. State Page 3
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Robert Brandon Guevara v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-brandon-guevara-v-state-texapp-2016.