Tiajah Terron Turner v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 16, 2024
• Docket: 02-23-00228-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-23-00228-CR ___________________________

TIAJAH TERRON TURNER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 3 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1736166

Before Kerr, Wallach, and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Tiajah Terron Turner appeals the trial court’s judgment convicting

him of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann.

§ 22.02(a)(2). Turner was originally placed on deferred-adjudication community

supervision. The State filed a petition to adjudicate him guilty. Turner pleaded not

true to the allegations in the State’s petition. Following a hearing, the trial court

adjudicated Turner guilty and assessed his punishment at eight years in prison. Turner

now appeals.

Upon reviewing the record and concluding that no arguable grounds for appeal

exist, Turner’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as

counsel and a brief in support of that motion. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738,

744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Counsel’s brief and motion meet the

requirements of Anders—he has presented a professional evaluation of the entire

record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. Id., 87 S. Ct. at

1400. We have independently examined the record, as is our duty upon receiving an

Anders brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v.

State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.); see also Penson v.

Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988). Turner did not file a pro se

response. The State agreed with appointed appellate counsel’s assessment that no

meritorious grounds for appeal exist and declined to file a brief.

2 After carefully reviewing the records and counsel’s brief, we agree with counsel

that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Our independent review of the

record reveals nothing further that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v.

State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State,

206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/s/ Elizabeth Kerr Elizabeth Kerr Justice

Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: May 16, 2024