Court Opinion

ID: 8208661
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-23 07:11:02.147998+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:34.358813
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals

                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                             ________________
                              NO. 09-22-00071-CR
                             ________________

                     DAVID SHANE ACOSTA, Appellant

                                        V.

                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________

                   On Appeal from the 411th District Court
                           Polk County, Texas
                          Trial Cause No. 27427
________________________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      In an open plea, Appellant David Shane Acosta pleaded guilty to the first-

degree felony offense of aggravated robbery. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03.

After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Acosta to fifteen years of

incarceration.

      Acosta’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s

professional evaluation of the record and concludes that the appeal is

frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d

                                        1
807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On May 23, 2022, we granted an extension of time for

Acosta to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Acosta.

      We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion

that no arguable issues support the appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d

503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1

      AFFIRMED.

                                                    ________________________________
                                                        W. SCOTT GOLEMON
                                                            Chief Justice

Submitted on August 29, 2022
Opinion Delivered September 21, 2022
Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

      1Acosta   may challenge our opinion in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.1.
                                          2