Laquinta Doniell Joseph v. State

Opinion issued March 29, 2012.

In The

Court of

Appeals

For The

First District

of Texas

————————————

NO. 01-09-01155-CR

———————————

Laquinta D. Joseph , Appellant

V.

The State of

Texas , Appellee

On Appeal from the 208th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 1172327

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Laquinta D. Joseph, pleaded guilty to the offense

of murder, without an agreed recommendation from the State as to punishment. See Tex.

Penal Code Ann . § 19.02 (West 2011).Appellant and the State agreed,

however, that appellant’s punishment would not exceed twenty-five years’

confinement . After a presentence investigation,

the trial court assessed punishment at twenty-five years’ confinement. The

trial court certified that this is a plea bargain case but that appellant has

been given permission to appeal. Appellant timely appealed.

Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to

withdraw, along with an Anders brief

stating that the record presents no reversible error and therefore the appeal

is without merit and is frivolous. See

Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).

An attorney has an ethical obligation to refuse to prosecute

a frivolous appeal. In re Schulman ,

252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). If an appointed attorney finds a

case to be wholly frivolous, her obligation to her client is to seek leave to

withdraw. Id. Counsel’s obligation to

the appellate court is to assure it, through an Anders brief, that, after a complete review of the record, the

request to withdraw is well-founded. Id. If

we agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous, we will grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. See Garner v. State , 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). If

we conclude that arguable grounds for appeal exist, however, we will grant the

motion to withdraw, abate the case, and remand it to the trial court to appoint

new counsel to file a brief on the merits. See

Bledsoev. State , 178 S.W.3d 824 , 826 - 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Here, the record reflects that

counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant and informed herof her right

to examine the appellate record andto file a response. See Schulman , 252 S.W.3d at 408 . More than 30 days have passed, and

appellant has not filed a pro se response.

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders

requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744 , 87 S.Ct. at

1400 ; see also High v. State , 573

S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex.Crim.App.1978). Counsel supplies us with references to the

record and provides us with citation to legal authorities. Counsel indicates

that she has thoroughly reviewed the record and that she is unable to advance

any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See

Anders , 386 U.S. at 744 , 87 S.Ct. at 1400 ; Mitchell v. State , 193 S.W.3d 153, 154 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st

Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

We

have independently reviewed the entire record, and we conclude that no

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

review, and that therefore the appeal is frivolous. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744 , 87 S.Ct. at 1400 ; Garner , 300 S.W.3d at 767 (explaining that frivolity is determined

by considering whether there are “arguable grounds” for review); Bledsoe , 178 S.W.3d at 826 - 27 (emphasizing

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

proceedings, whether the appeal is wholly frivolous); Mitchell , 193 S.W.3d at 155 . Although we may issue an opinion explaining

why the appeal lacks arguable merit, we are not required to do so. See Garner , 300 S.W.3d at 767 . An

appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal

by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals.

See Bledsoe , 178 S.W.3d 827 & n.6 .

We

affirm the trial court’s judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. [1] Attorney,Patricia

Segura, must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court. See Tex.

R. App. P. 6.5(c).

PER

CURIAM

Panel

consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Brown.

Do

not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2( b).

[1] Appointed

counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and

that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State ,

178 S.W.3d 824 , 826 - 27 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).