Levi Samuel Love v. State

Summarize Case

Related Cases

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-07-242 CR

____________________



LEVI SAMUEL LOVE, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 98151



MEMORANDUM OPINION

Levi Samuel Love appeals his conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.02(a)(2) (Vernon Supp. 2007). Appellate counsel filed a brief concluding the record revealed no reversible error. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Love filed a pro se response brief presenting three issues for review. The State filed a brief contending Love's pro se issues lack merit. We affirm the trial court's judgment.

The Court of Criminal Appeals directs that we not address the merits of issues raised in Anders briefs or pro se responses. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate court may determine either (1) "that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error"; or (2) "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.

After careful review of the entire record, the briefs of appellate counsel and the State, along with the pro se brief of appellant, we find no arguable error. See id. Appointment of new counsel is not required. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Appellant is free to file a petition for discretionary review raising error by this Court in the instant appeal. (1) All pro se motions currently pending before the Court are denied. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

AFFIRMED.

__________________________________

CHARLES KREGER

Justice

Submitted on October 1, 2007

Opinion Delivered March 12, 2008

Do not publish



Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.

1. However, "[w]hile an appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review with [the Court of Criminal Appeals], review is not a matter of right." Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 n.6 (citing Tex. R. App. P. 66.2).