Jeffrey Boyce Jones v. State

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-12-00288-CR JEFFREY BOYCE JONES APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------- FROM THE 432ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 ---------- Appellant Jeffrey Boyce Jones appeals his felony convictions for two counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of indecency with a child by contact. Appellant pled guilty to all three counts pursuant to an open plea, and the trial judge assessed his punishment at thirty-five years’ confinement for each aggravated sexual assault count and twenty years’ 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. confinement for the indecency with a child count, all to run concurrently. We affirm. Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. In the brief, counsel avers that, in his professional opinion, the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California, by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967); see In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406–12 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). We gave appellant an opportunity to file a pro se brief, but he has not done so. Likewise, the State has not filed a brief. Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we are obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988). We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 2 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. TERRIE LIVINGSTON CHIEF JUSTICE PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and GABRIEL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: September 19, 2013 3