### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03 - 19 - 00372 - CR
Cameron Mitchell Moore, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 428TH DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY NO. CR - 18 - 0166, THE HONORABLE WILLIAM R. HENRY, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Cameron Mitchell Moore was charged with aggravated kidnapping, stalking , attempted capital murder, violating a protective order by committing assault, and violating a protective order by commi tting stalking

. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 15.01, 19.03, 20.04, 25.07(g), 42.07 2

. At the end of the gu i lt

- innoc ence phase, the jury acquitted Moor e of aggravated kidnapping and the lesser offense of kidnapping ; acquit ted him of attempted capital murder but convicted him of the lesse r offense of assault fam ily violence ; and convicted him of stalking , violating a protective order by committing assault , and violating a protective order by committing stalking. See id. §§ 22.0 1, 25.07(g), 42.072

. Moore was sen tenced to ten years ’ impris o nment for each conviction. See id. § 12.34

. Following his convictions , Moore appealed the district court ’ s judgments of conviction

. Moore ’ s court

- appo inted attorney on appeal filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Ande rs brief contending that the a p peal is frivo lous and2

without merit. See Anders v. Californi a , 386 U.S. 738, 744

- 45 (1967)

. We agree and affirm the trial court ’ s judgments of conviction.

During the trial, evidence was presented regarding Moore ’ s relation ship with the victim, Victori a Warren, the mother of one of his children. Moore and Warren began da ting in 2010 , and Warren testified that Moore assaulted her and threatened to kill her multiple times during their relationship and strangled her while she was pregnant

. In the fall of 201 7, W arren ended the relationship and moved to another city. Moore found out the new school where Warren enr olled her children , went to the school, waited to see which bus her children go t on, and followed the bus to where the children and Warren were n ow l iving. Later , Moore returned to the home , kicked in the front door , and held a gun to Warren ’ s head . Moore left the home after one of Warren ’ s children begged him not to kill Warren. Warren called the police, and a
p rotective order was issued prohi b iting Moore f rom being within a specific distance of Warren ’ s home , committing additional ac ts of family violence, and stalking Warren

. Later that month, Warren saw Moore near her hom e when she was driving and called th e police to report that Moore had v i olated the protective orde r . When the police arrive d , Moore was arrested.

The following month, Warren noticed Moore following her while she was driving and tried unsuccessfully to evade him . Warren called 911 , and the oper ator told her to drive to the police station. A recording of the 911 call was admitted into evidence

. Warren mi ssed the parking lot ent rance for the police station but parked at a near by business a nd ra n to the p olice station. Moore al so pulled into the business and then chased War ren . V ideo recordings from the police station admitted into evidence showed W arr en entering the lobb y of the police station and Moore fol lowing shortly thereafter , grabb ing her by the head , dragg ing her out of the station , and forc ing her into the par king lot while h olding his arms around her neck.3 After hearing the commotion, police officers and an employee of the business where Moore and Warren had parked ran out side to determine what was happening

. The employee and the officers found Warren on the gr ound with Moore on top of her strangling her

. Warren testified that sh e started to lose consciousness whi le Moore was st rangling her. One of the officers drew her handgun and ordered Moore to release Warren, and Moore eventually complied

. O nce Mo ore lo os ene d his grip, Warren got awa y from him and went inside the police station

. The police arrested Moore and discovere d a kni fe and a zip tie on his person. After Moore was arre sted, W arr en wen t to the hospital for treatment

. W arr en h ad difficulty breathin g before goin g to the hospital and had trouble swallowing for days

. The physician’s assistant who tr eated Warren testifie d that she had ligature marks o n her neck and thr oat consistent with being strangled

.

During the charge conference , bo th parties ask ed the t rial cou rt to include a lesser

i ncluded

- offense instruction for the offense of assault family viole nce in the attempted

- capital

murder ch arge , and Moore requested a lesser

- included instruction for kidnapping in the
ag gravated

- kidnappi ng charge . Th e trial court granted both requests. T he jury acquitted Moor e of aggravated kidnapping and the lesser offense of kidnapping and acquit ted him of attempted capital murder , but the jury convicted him of the lesser offense of assault fam ily vio lence

. See Te x. Penal Co de § 22.0 1

. The jury also convicted Moore of stalking , violating a protective order by committing assault , and violating a protective order by committing stalking. See id. §§ 25.07(g), 42.072

.

In the punishment phase, Warren testified re gard ing addition al act s of violence that occurred during her relations hip with Moore and thr eats that he made about her and her children. During Warren ’ s testimony, multiple jail recordings were admitted into evidence4

documenting threats by Moore to murde r he r and other women with whom he was romanti cally involved and capturing statements by Moore in which he asser ted how prot ective orders will not prevent him from hurting people . In addition, jail employees testified regarding an incident in which Moore crac ked the glas s divi der in the visitation cent er while he was talking with someone, and a video recording and pho tographs regarding the in cident were admitted into evidence. Members of Moore ’ s family testified that Moore ’ s father abused him and his moth er

a nd that Moor e is a good father to his children. Moore was sentenced to ten years ’ imprisonment for each conviction.

Moore ’ s court

- appointed attorney ’ s b rief c oncluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit meets the requirements of Anders v . Cali fornia by pr esen t ing a professional evaluation of th e record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advance d. See 386 U. S. at 744

- 45 ; Garner v. State , 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) ; see also Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 81

- 82 (198 8) (e xpl aining that Anders briefs s erve purpose of “assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fac t condu cted t he required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is

. . . frivolous”). Moore ’ s counsel represented to the Court t ha t he provi ded copies of the motion and brie f to Moore ; advised Moo re of his right to examine the appellate record, file a p ro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and provided Moore with a form motion for p ro s e access to the appellate r ecord along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State , 43 6 S.W.3d 3 13, 319

- 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)

.

After filing an Ande rs brief, Moore ’ s attorney informed this Court that Moore was cha rged wit h three othe r felonies that are still pending and that Moore was declared incomp etent to stand trial in at least one of thos e cases. Because Moore ha d been declared incompetent ,5

Moore ’ s attorney asked this Court to abate the appeal to allow Moore the oppo rtunity to e xe rcise his rights under Anders (e.g., to review the record and prepare his own pro se brief) after he has regai ned competency. Accordingly, this Court abated the appeal

. See Moore v. State , No. 03

- 19

- 00372

- CR, 2020 WL 412143, at *1 ( Tex. App

. — Austin Jan

. 16 , 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). After being informed that Moore ’ s competency h ad been restored, this Court reinstated the appeal. Following reinstatement , Moore filed a motion for
pro se access to the appellat e record and a motion fo r an extension of time to file a pro se brief , and both motions were granted. However, the time per mitted to file a bri ef has e xpired , and Moore has not filed a pro se brief

.

We have independently reviewed the record an d have found nothing t ha t might arguably support the appeal. Se e Anders , 386 U.S. a t 744 ; Garner , 300 S.W.3d at 766

. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without mer it. We grant c ounsel ’ s motion to withdraw and affirm the district cour t ’ s judgment s of convi ct ion

.

__________________________________ ________ Thomas J. Baker , Justice Before Justices Go odwin, Ba ker , and Smit h Affi rm ed F iled: O cto ber 20, 2021 Do Not Publish