Sadarius Greer v. the State of Texas
This text of Sadarius Greer v. the State of Texas (Sadarius Greer v. the State of Texas) 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. 10-23-00425-CR
SADARIUS GREER, Appellant v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021-1621-C2
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After a jury trial, Sadarius Greer was convicted of Possession of a Controlled
Substance With Intent to Deliver, To-Wit: Methamphetamine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY
CODE ANN. § 481.112. He pled “true” to one felony enhancement paragraph and the jury
assessed his punishment at sixty years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal
Justice Institutional Division. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 12.42(c)(1), 12.42(f). The trial court sentenced Greer accordingly, and this appeal followed. We affirm the judgment of
the trial court.
Greer’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 demonstrates a professional evaluation of the
record for error and he has demonstrated compliance with the other duties of appointed
counsel. See id. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.]
1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman,
252 S.W.3d 403, 407-09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). By letter, we informed Greer of his right
to review the appellate record and to file a pro se response. Greer did not file a pro se
response.
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must conduct a full examination of the
proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744;
see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 349-50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988).
Arguments are frivolous when they “cannot conceivably persuade the court.” McCoy v.
Ct. of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 436 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record and counsel's
brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28
(Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Greer is granted.
Greer v. State Page 2 STEVE SMITH Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed December 5, 2024 Do not publish [CRPM]
Greer 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
Sadarius Greer v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sadarius-greer-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.