Tony Wayne Anderson v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 2, 2009
• Docket: 14-08-00720-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 2, 2009

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 2, 2009.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-08-00720-CR

TONY WAYNE ANDERSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 402nd District Court

 Wood County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 13,785-93

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of murder.  On November 15, 1993, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for life in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a fine of $5,000.

On February 6, 2008, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted appellant an out-of-time appeal on issues related to sentencing.  Ex parte Anderson, No. AP-75836, 2008 WL 366583 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb, 6, 2008).  The Court=s mandate issued March 3, 2008, and appellant filed a notice of appeal on April 3, 2008.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (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, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  On March 19, 2009, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel=s brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel=s brief, and appellant=s response, and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.  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 Seymore, Brown, and Sullivan.

Do Not Publish C Tex.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