Opinion issued July 12, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00357-CR

———————————

KENNETH L. BROWN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 177th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1389982

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Kenneth L. Brown, was found guilty by a jury of the felony offense 

of aggravated robbery. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03(a)(2) (West 2011). 

Appellant pleaded true to two enhancement paragraphs in the indictment resulting 

in an increased punishment range of twenty-five to ninety-nine years’ imprisonment 
2

upon conviction. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.42(d) (West Supp. 2015). The

jury assessed punishment at thirty-eight years’ imprisonment. Appellant timely filed 

a notice of appeal.

Appellant’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.).

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 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–
3

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. 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). Attorney Bob Wicoff must immediately send appellant the required notice 

and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Higley, Bland, and Massengale.

Do not publish.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