Court Opinion

ID: 2951974
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-16 21:57:47.290049+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:23.831842
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                       NO. 03-09-00693-CR
                                       NO. 03-09-00694-CR

                                   Lawrence Joiner, Appellant

                                                  v.

                                   The State of Texas, Appellee

    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
     NOS. 13678 & 13679, HONORABLE TERRY L. FLENNIKEN, JUDGE PRESIDING

                             MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Lawrence Joiner pleaded guilty to the offenses of aggravated robbery and tampering

with evidence. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03 (West 2003), § 37.09 (West Supp. 2009). At his

request, a jury trial was held on punishment for both convictions. Joiner appeals the jury’s sentences

of thirty years and ten years running concurrently for the respective offenses of aggravated robbery

and evidence tampering.

               Joiner’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief in each case concluding that the

appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there

are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State,

573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);

Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137
(Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Joiner received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to

examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.

               We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See

Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Counsel’s motion to withdraw

is granted.

               The judgments are affirmed.

                                              G. Alan Waldrop, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: August 3, 2010

Do Not Publish

                                                 2