Joe Bradley Roberson, Jr. v. State

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § JOE BRADLEY ROBERSON, JR., No. 08-13-00336-CR § Appellant, Appeal from § v. Criminal District Court No. 3 § THE STATE OF TEXAS, of Tarrant County, Texas § Appellee. (TC # 1306790D) § MEMORANDUM OPINION Joe Bradley Roberson, Jr. appeals his conviction of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered an open plea of guilty. The trial court found Appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for ten years. We affirm. FRIVOLOUS APPEAL Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U .S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008)(“In Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance ‘arguable’ points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.”); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). A copy of counsel’s brief has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. Appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment is affirmed. March 19, 2015 ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, J., and Barajas, C.J., (Senior Judge) (Barajas, C.J., Senior Judge, sitting by assignment, not participating) (Do Not Publish) -2-