In the

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 Cleef
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

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

a sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02 (Supp.). Jeffery

appeals.1

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

arguable issues that could be raised on appeal. The brief sets out the procedural history of the 

case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceedings.

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

to be advanced meets the 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). Counsel also filed a motion with 

this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. 

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

withdraw and a pro se motion for access to the appellate record lacking only Jeffery’s signature. 

Counsel informed Jeffery of his rights to review the record and file a pro se response. By letter 

dated January 24, this Court informed Jeffery that his signed pro se motion for access to the 

appellate record was due on or before February 14. On February 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 companion case number 06-22-00124-CR, Jeffery also appeals his conviction of murder. 
3

that the case would be set for submission on the briefs on April 24. Jeffery filed neither a pro se 

response nor a motion requesting 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 and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue 

supports an appeal. 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 merit, we must affirm the trial 

court’s judgment. Id.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.2

Charles van Cleef

Justice

Date Submitted: April 24, 2023

Date Decided: April 25, 2023

Do Not Publish

2Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel’s 

request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute 

counsel will be appointed. Should appellant desire 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 file a pro se petition 

for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from either the 

date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court, see TEX.

R. APP. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3, 

and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see TEX. R.

APP. P. 68.4.