Court Opinion

ID: 4517612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-03-18 22:15:39.102326+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:25:39.418607
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-19-00033-CR
                               __________________

                       ANGELO HERNANDEZ, Appellant

                                        V.

                        THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

                  On Appeal from the County Court
                      San Jacinto County, Texas
                       Trial Cause No. 2017-84
__________________________________________________________________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Angelo Hernandez appeals his conviction for resisting arrest, a Class A

misdemeanor.1 Hernandez’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief,

in which she contends no arguable grounds can be advanced to support Hernandez’s

      1
          See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.03.

                                         1
appeal. 2 In the brief, counsel presents her professional evaluation of the record, and

she explains why no arguable issues can be raised to support Hernandez’s appeal.3

      Subsequently, we granted an extension of time to allow Hernandez to file a

pro se response. But he did not do so.

      After reviewing the appellate record and the Anders brief filed by counsel, we

agree with counsel’s conclusion that Hernandez cannot raise any arguable issues to

support the appeal. We also conclude Hernandez’s appeal is frivolous. For these

reasons, we need not appoint new counsel to re-brief the appeal.4

      The trial court’s judgment is affirmed. 5

      AFFIRMED.

                                                     _________________________
                                                          HOLLIS HORTON
                                                               Justice

      2
       See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d
807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
      3
          See id.
      4
         Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requiring
court appointment of other counsel only if it is determined that arguable grounds
exist to support the appeal).
      5
         Hernandez may challenge our decision in the case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
                                          2
Submitted on October 15, 2019
Opinion Delivered March 18, 2020
Do Not Publish

Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

                                         3