Court Opinion

ID: 6320057
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-03-04 08:13:26.183847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:20.613109
License: Public Domain

In The

                                Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                               __________________

                               NO. 09-21-00226-CR
                               __________________

                     REGINALD CARVIN KYLES, Appellant

                                         V.

                       THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

               On Appeal from the 356th District Court
                       Hardin County, Texas
                       Trial Cause No. 25280
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

        In an open plea, appellant Reginal Carvin Kyles pleaded guilty to murder.

After conducting a sentencing hearing, the trial court assessed Kyles’s punishment

at life in prison.

       Kyles’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 807 (Tex.

                                         1
Crim. App. 1978). On November 15, 2021, we granted an extension of time for

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

      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 February 18, 2022
Opinion Delivered March 2, 2022
Do Not Publish

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

      1
        Kyles may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
                                         2