Aaron Hellner v. State

Affirmed and Opinion Filed October 21, 2014 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01050-CR AARON HELLNER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12-63629-J MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Lang, and Evans Opinion by Justice Bridges A jury convicted Aaron Hellner of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 31.07(a) (West 2011). The trial court assessed punishment, enhanced by two prior felony convictions, at four years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases). We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We affirm the trial court’s judgment. Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 131050F.U05     /David L. Bridges/   DAVID L. BRIDGES   JUSTICE ‐2‐    Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT AARON HELLNER, Appellant Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. No. 05-13-01050-CR V. F12-63629-J). Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges, THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Lang and Evans participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered October 21, 2014         ‐3‐