Affirmed; Opinion Filed May 12 , 2016.

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 15
- 00969
- CR No. 05
- 15
- 00972
- CR PHYLLIS RENAY BURNS , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F 15
- 52149
- M , F15
- 54887
- M 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Ju stice Wright, Justice Bridges, and Justice Lang

Opinion by Justice Lang A grand jury in dicted Phyllis Renay Burns, appellant, for assault on a public servant and retaliation. Appellant entered an open plea of guilty and judicially confessed to both charges. The trial court sentenced her to four years’ imprisonment in each case. Appellant fil ed a motion for new trial in both cases. The trial court denied both motions. Appellant timely appealed. On appeal, appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel accompanied by a brief
in which she cites Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and concludes the record contains no reversible error to raise any arguable issues for appeal. The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief– 2

–

to the appellant. We advised appellant of her right to file a pro se response. However, appellant did not file a pro se response. “When an Anders brief is filed, our duty i s to determine whether there are any arguable grounds for reversal, and if so, to remand the case to the trial court for the appointment of new counsel to address the issues.” In Interest of Ka.D. , No. 05

- 15

- 01185

- CV, 2015 WL 9481441, at *1 (Tex. App.

– Dall as Dec. 29, 2015, no pet.) (citing Beldsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)). We have reviewed the entire record and the Anders brief. See id. We agree there is no arguable ground for reversal in the record and the appeal is frivolous a nd without merit. See Beldsoe , 178 S.W.3d at 827

. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s conviction of appellant for assault on a public servant and for retaliation. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b) 150969F.U05– 3

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
PHYLLIS RENAY BURNS, Appellant
No. 05

- 15

- 00969

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F15

- 52149

- M Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Chief Justice Wright and Justice Bridges participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the tr ial court is AFFIRMED

. Judgment entered this 12th day of May, 2016.– 4

– 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
PHYLLIS RENAY BURNS, Appellant
No. 05

- 15

- 00972

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F15

- 54887

- M Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Chief Justice Wright and Justice Bridges participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFI RMED

. Judgment entered this 12th day of May, 2016.