Opinion issued November 22, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-01029-CR

———————————

HASSAN ABDUL WORTHY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1427858

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Hassan Abdul Worthy pleaded guilty to the first-degree felony offense of 

murder. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 19.02(b) (West 2011). The plea was without 

an agreed recommendation by the State on sentencing. The trial court sentenced 

Worthy to 45 years’ imprisonment. The trial court certification of defendant’s right 
2

of appeal indicates this was not a plea-bargain case and Worthy had the right to 

appeal. 

Worthy’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along 

with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is

without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 

1396 (1967). 

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal 

authority. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 

S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly 

reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant 

reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell v. State, 193 

S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Counsel provided Worthy with a form motion for access to a copy of the 

record, but Worthy did not file this motion with the Court. The deadline for his pro 

se response to counsel’s Anders brief was July 25, 2016. Worthy filed no response 

and requested no extension of time.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we 

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds 

for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 
3

1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full 

examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 

300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine 

whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–

27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court 

determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note 

that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for 

appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal 

Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to 

withdraw.1 Attorney Kevin P. Keating must immediately send Worthy the required 

notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P.

6.5(c). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Brown, and Huddle.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

 

1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal 

and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of 

Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).