Zachary Alexander Woods v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 31, 2024
• Docket: 03-23-00434-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-23-00434-CR

Zachary Alexander Woods, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 22ND DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. CR2022-095, THE HONORABLE DANIEL H. MILLS, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Zachary Alexander Woods was convicted by a jury of aggravated

kidnapping. See Tex. Penal Code § 20.04(a)(4)–(5). Appellant pleaded true to five prior felony

convictions, and, pursuant to the Penal Code’s habitual offender provision, the jury assessed his

punishment at life imprisonment and a $10,000 fine. See id. § 12.42(c)(1). The trial court

sentenced appellant to the assessed punishment.

Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by

a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the

requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record

demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);

Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio,

488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988). Appellant’s counsel has also forwarded to this Court a copy of a letter that he sent to appellant, in which counsel asserted that he sent copies of the motion and

brief to appellant; informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se

response; and provided him with a motion to assist him in obtaining the record. See Kelly

v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. To

date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have conducted an independent review of the record, including the record of

the trial and sentencing proceedings below and appellate counsel’s brief, and find no reversible

error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably

meritorious grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court’s judgment of

conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Smith and Theofanis

Affirmed

Filed: July 31, 2024

Do Not Publish