## In t he Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 22

- 00125

- CR

ROBERT CLEVON JEFFERY , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 8th District Court Delta County, Texas Trial Court No. 7816

Before Stevens , C.J., van Cleef and Rambin , JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice van Cleef2 

### ME MORANDUM OPINION

A Delta County jury convicted Robert Clevon Jeffery of aggravated assault and assessed

a sentence of fifteen years’ i mprisonment

. S ee T EX

. P ENAL C OD E A NN

. § 22 .02 (Supp.)

. Jeffery

appeals. 1

Jeffery ’ s attorney filed a brief stat ing that he reviewed the record and found no genuinely

arguable issues that could be raised on appeal

. The brief sets out the procedural history o f the

case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceeding s

.

C ounsel ’ s professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds

to be advanced m eet s t he requirements of Anders v. California

. Anders v. California , 386 U.S.

738, 743

– 44 (1967); In re Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig.

proceeding); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 509

– 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State

,

573 S. W .2d 807, 812

– 13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Couns el als o filed a motion with

this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.

On January 23, 2023 , counsel mailed Jeffery cop ies of the brief and the motion to

w ithdraw and a pro se moti o n for access to the appellate record lacking only Jeffery’ s sig na ture.

Counsel informed Jeffery of his right s to review the record and file a pro se response

. By letter

dated January 24 , this Court informed Jeffery that his signed pr o se motion for access t o the

appellate record was due on or before February 14. On F ebruary 21, we informed Jeffery that

any pro se response was due on or before March 23, and on April 3, we further informed Jeffery

1 In c ompanion case number 06

- 22

- 00 12 4

- C R , Jeffery als o appeals his convict i on of murder

.3

that the case would be set for submis sion on the briefs on Ap r il 24. Jeffery filed neither a pro se

response nor a motion r equesting an extension of time in which to file such a response.

We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently

reviewed the entire appellate record a nd, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issu e

supports an ap pe al. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826

– 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In

the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without me rit, we must affirm the trial

court’s judgment. Id.

We affirm the judgment of the trial co urt. 2

C ha rles van Cleef Justice

Date Submitted: April 24, 2023 Date Decided: April 25, 202 3

Do Not Publish

2 Since we agree that this case presents no reversible e rr or, we also, in accordance with Anders , grant counsel’s request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. See An ders , 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute

couns e l will be appointed. Should appellant desire to seek further review of th is case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pr o se petition for disc retionary review. An y petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days fr om either the date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court, s ee T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk o f the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.3, and (3) s hould comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.4.