Court Opinion

ID: 9947220
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-04 12:10:08.541161+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:26:12.871480
License: Public Domain

In the
        Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
         at Fort Worth
     ___________________________

          No. 02-23-00075-CR
     ___________________________

 LYNEISHA MARIE MCCUIN, Appellant

                     V.

          THE STATE OF TEXAS

  On Appeal from the 372nd District Court
         Tarrant County, Texas
        Trial Court No. 1771194R

  Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Wallach, JJ.
  Memorandum Opinion by Justice Wallach
                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

       A jury convicted Lyneisha Marie McCuin of the offense of murder and

assessed her punishment at 35 years’ confinement. The trial court sentenced her

accordingly. We affirm.

       McCuin’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel

and a brief in support of that motion, in which he avers that, in his professional

opinion, the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by

professionally evaluating the appellate record and demonstrating why no arguable

grounds for relief exist. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510–11 & n.3 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1991). Although McCuin filed a pro se response to the Anders brief, the State

declined to file a responsive brief.

       After an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the

ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills Anders’s requirements, we must

independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on her

behalf. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511. Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

       We have carefully reviewed counsel’s brief and the appellate record. We agree

with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in

the appellate record that arguably might support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State,

178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684,

                                           2
685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw

and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

                                                  /s/ Mike Wallach
                                                  Mike Wallach
                                                  Justice

Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: February 29, 2024

                                         3