Court Opinion

ID: 9893715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-30 09:54:20.510245+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:05:16.717468
License: Public Domain

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

           No. 02-22-00241-CR
           No. 02-22-00242-CR
      ___________________________

DESMOND GERMAIN NORFLEET, Appellant

                       V.

           THE STATE OF TEXAS

   On Appeal from the 396th District Court
            Tarrant County, Texas
    Trial Court Nos. 1578554D, 1697505D

  Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ.
    Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr
                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

       In separate cause numbers, a grand jury indicted Desmond Germain Norfleet

for murder and sexual assault, and––without a plea bargain––he pleaded guilty to each

offense. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 19.02(b)(1), 22.011(a)(1)(B). After a single

punishment hearing, the trial court assessed Norfleet’s punishment at 75 years’

confinement and a $10,000 fine for each conviction and sentenced him accordingly,

ordering the sentences to run concurrently. Norfleet did not object to the sentences.

       Norfleet’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 appeals are 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). Counsel also complied with Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2014).

       This court gave Norfleet the opportunity to file a response on his own behalf.

We received a letter dated July 12, 2023, in which he informed the court that his

court-appointed appellate counsel had already filed a notice of appeal. The State

declined to file a response.

       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

                                           2
independently examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on his

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 records. We agree

with counsel that these appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit; we find

nothing in the appellate records that arguably might support these appeals. 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, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgments.

                                                      /s/ Elizabeth Kerr
                                                      Elizabeth Kerr
                                                      Justice

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

Delivered: October 26, 2023

                                           3