IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00206-CR

DEVANTE JEFFERSON,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 272nd District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17-02624-CRF-272

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Devante Jefferson entered pleas of guilty to four counts of aggravated 

robbery with a deadly weapon. The issue of punishment was tried to a jury which 

assessed punishment at thirty-five years’ incarceration on each count.

Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 

493 (1967), Jefferson’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a brief and motion to 

withdraw with this Court, stating that his review of the record yielded no grounds of 

error upon which an appeal can be predicated. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements 
Jefferson v. State Page 2

of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation demonstrating why there are no 

arguable grounds to advance on appeal. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 n.9 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2008) (“In Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance ‘arguable’ 

points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts 

and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.”) (citing Hawkins v. State, 

112 S.W.3d 340, 343-44 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.)); Stafford v. State, 813 

S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 

1978), Jefferson’s counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there 

is no reversible error in the trial court’s judgments. Counsel has informed this Court that 

he has: (1) examined the record and found no arguable grounds to advance on appeal; 

(2) served a copy of the brief and counsel’s motion to withdraw on Jefferson; and (3) 

informed Jefferson of his right to review the record and to file a pro se response.1 See 

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 510 n.3; see also Schulman, 

252 S.W.3d at 409 n.23. More than an adequate period of time has passed, and Jefferson

has not filed a pro se response. See Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409.

Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all the 

proceedings to determine whether the case is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 

75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 350, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record and 

counsel’s brief and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. See 

 

1 Counsel has informed this Court that he has provided the appellate record to Jefferson. See Kelly v. State, 

436 S.W.3d 313, 321-22 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).
Jefferson v. State Page 3

Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (“Due to the nature of 

Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion that it considered the issues raised in the briefs 

and reviewed the record for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the 

requirement of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.”); Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 509. The 

judgments of the trial court are therefore affirmed.

In accordance with Anders, Jefferson’s attorney has asked this Court for permission 

to withdraw as counsel for Jefferson. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see also 

Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408 n.17 (quoting Jeffery v. State, 903 S.W.2d 776, 779-80 (Tex. 

App.—Dallas 1995, no pet.) (“If an attorney believes the appeal is frivolous, he must 

withdraw from representing the appellant. To withdraw from representation, the 

appointed attorney must file a motion to withdraw accompanied by a brief showing the 

appellate court that the appeal is frivolous.”)). We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 

Within five days of the date of this Court’s opinion, counsel is ordered to send a copy of 

this opinion and this Court’s judgment to Jefferson and to advise him of his right to file a 

petition for discretionary review.2 See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4; see also Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 

at 412 n.35; Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670, 673 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

 

2 No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Jefferson wish to seek further review of this case by the 

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review 

or must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed 

within thirty days from the date of this opinion or from the date the last timely motion for rehearing was 

overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition and all copies of the petition for discretionary 

review must be filed with the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition 

for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4; see also Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.22.
Jefferson v. State Page 4

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed November 27, 2019

Do not publish

[CRPM]