Affirmed and Opinion Filed December 7, 2017 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00560-CR 

No. 05-16-00561-CR 

No. 05-16-00562-CR 

No. 05-16-00563-CR 

MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F08-57650-U, F14-70586-U, F14-70971-U, F14-75674-U 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Bridges, Myers, and Schenck 

Opinion by Justice Bridges 

Appellant Mercedes M. Biggurs appeals her convictions, following the adjudication of 

her guilt, for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, theft of property valued at $1,500 or 

more but less than $20,000, and two injury to a child offenses. The trial court assessed 

punishment at two years’ confinement in state jail for the theft conviction, ten years’ 

imprisonment for each injury to a child conviction, and fifteen years’ imprisonment for the 

aggravated robbery conviction. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she 

concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements 

of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the 

record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 
 –2– 

S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets 

requirements of Anders). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised 

appellant of her right to file a pro se response, but she did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. 

State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se 

response to Anders brief filed by counsel). 

 We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree 

the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably 

support the appeals. 

 We affirm the trial court’s judgments. 

Do Not Publish 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47 

160560F.U05 

 

/David L. Bridges/ 

DAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant 

No. 05-16-00560-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F08-57650-U. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Myers and Schenck participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered December 7, 2017. 

 
 –4– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant 

No. 05-16-00561-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F14-70586-U. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Myers and Schenck participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered December 7, 2017. 

 
 –5– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant 

No. 05-16-00562-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F14-70971-U. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Myers and Schenck participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered December 7, 2017. 

 
 –6– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant 

No. 05-16-00563-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F14-75674-U. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Myers and Schenck participating. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

Judgment entered December 7, 2017.