Opinion issued June 25, 2013
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01-11-00448-CR
____________
ROY EDGAR WESLEY, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 182nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1272842
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Roy Edgar Wesley, pleaded guilty to the offense of aggravated
assault with a deadly weapon, without an agreed recommendation from the State
regarding punishment. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(a)(2) (West 2011). The
trial court found appellant guilty and assessed punishment at 10 years’ confinement.
The trial court certified that this is not a plea bargain case and that appellant has the
right to appeal. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
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).
Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal
authority. 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 indicates that he has
thoroughly reviewed the record and that he 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, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
In his pro se response, appellant argues that the complainant committed
aggravated assault against him, that he acted in self-defense, and that he only
intended to scare the complainant and did not intend to actually shoot the
complainant. He also argues that he did not know that he could be sentenced to 10
years’ imprisonment. Further, he argues that he was not indicted on the date
provided in counsel’s brief and that he could not have shot the complainant on the
2
date stated in counsel’s brief. Finally, he argues that he was told he could withdraw
his guilty plea, but the trial judge denied his motion to withdraw the plea.
We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, 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 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—
determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly
frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009)
(reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review exist);
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell,
193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds exist by
reviewing entire record). 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 at 827 & n.6.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw.1 Attorney Kenneth McCoy must immediately send the notice required
1
Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal
and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App.
1997).
3
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 Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Huddle.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4