Court Opinion

ID: 2985298
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-23 00:07:05.944344+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:19:28.350676
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 12, 2013.

                                     In The

                    Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                             NO. 14-13-00498-CR

              CHRISTOPHER BERNARD LAWSON, Appellant
                                       V.

                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                   On Appeal from the 337th District Court
                           Harris County, Texas
                       Trial Court Cause No. 1323274

                 MEMORANDUM                     OPINION

      Appellant entered a plea of guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly
weapon. The conviction was enhanced with a prior felony conviction and the trial
court sentenced appellant to confinement for twenty-two years in the Institutional
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a notice of
appeal.
      Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal
is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to
be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

      A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991). As of this date, no
pro se response has been filed.

      We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree the
appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in
the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief
or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for
review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

      Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                       PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jamison.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                         2