Court Opinion

ID: 9909363
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-13 07:09:08.4705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:09.253766
License: Public Domain

Affirm and Opinion Filed December 5, 2023

                                     In The
                           Court of Appeals
                    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                              No. 05-22-00523-CR

                      JERRY WAYNE FORD, Appellant
                                  V.
                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

              On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court
                           Dallas County, Texas
                    Trial Court Cause No. F20-76542

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
             Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Reichek, and Breedlove
                          Opinion by Justice Breedlove
      Jerry Wayne Ford was indicted for murder. The jury found appellant guilty,

and the court assessed his punishment at life imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s

court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which she concluded the appeal is wholly

frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). She

also filed an accompanying motion to withdraw as appointed counsel.
        Appellant was provided a complete record and advised of his rights to file a

pro se response. Appellant filed a pro se response.1

        The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that when a court of appeals receives

an Anders brief and a pro se response, the reviewing court has two choices. Bledsoe

v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). After conducting an

independent examination of the record, “[the appellate court] may determine that the

appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the

record and finds no reversible error[.] Or, it may determine that arguable grounds

for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be

appointed to brief the issues.” Id. at 826–27 (internal citations omitted). The

appellate court does not address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or

in a pro se response when it has determined there are no arguable grounds for review.

Id. at 827.

        We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, including

counsel’s Anders brief2 and the issues raised in appellant’s pro se response. We

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds

    1
      Appellant’s response does not address counsel’s Anders brief or motion to withdraw but instead
argues in four issues that trial counsel was ineffective.
    2
      We note that counsel’s Anders brief was deficient in several areas, failing to address the following:
jury selection; jury instructions; any adverse rulings on post-trial motions; sufficiency of the evidence,
specifically including a recitation of the elements of the offense and the facts and evidence adduced at trial
relevant to those elements; and the arguments in appellant’s pro se response. However, as our independent
review of the record showed no arguable grounds for review, we note these deficiencies purely to provide
guidance to counsel for future Anders briefs.
                                                    –2–
for review, and, therefore, the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at

744 (reviewing court, and not counsel, determines—after full examination of

proceedings—whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763,

767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable

grounds for appeal exist).

      We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgments

as modified.

                                          /Maricela Breedlove/
220523f.u05                               MARICELA BREEDLOVE
Do Not Publish                            JUSTICE
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

                                       –3–
                            Court of Appeals
                     Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
                                 JUDGMENT

JERRY WAYNE FORD, Appellant                  On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial
                                             District Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-22-00523-CR          V.               Trial Court Cause No. F20-76542.
                                             Opinion delivered by Justice
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee                 Breedlove. Justices Partida-Kipness
                                             and Reichek participating.

    Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is
AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 5th day of December, 2023.

                                       –4–