Court Opinion

ID: 9385780
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-09 08:11:52.383902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:40.287123
License: Public Domain

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 6, 2023.

                                     In The

                    Fourteenth Court of Appeals
                                   ____________

                             NO. 14-22-00413-CR
                             NO. 14-22-00414-CR
                             NO. 14-22-00415-CR
                                   ____________

                        JACOB DAVIDSON, Appellant

                                       V.
                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                   On Appeal from the 337th District Court
                            Harris County, Texas
             Trial Court Cause Nos. 1731987, 1731986, & 1731988

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant Jacob Davidson appeals three judgments of conviction, each on a
charge of burglary of a habitation. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in
which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief
meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (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, 811–13 (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, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, more than
60 days have passed and 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).

      The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                  PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Zimmerer, and Wilson.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                         2