Opinion issued April 16, 2013.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NOS. 01-13-00002-CR
01-13-00003-CR
01-13-00004-CR
01-13-00005-CR
____________
JONTHON RAY PRICE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 10th District Court
Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 11CR2499, 11CR2500, 11CR2501 and 11CR2661
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Jonthon Ray Price, pleaded guilty without an agreed punishment
recommendation to three charges of aggravated robbery and one charge of
aggravated kidnapping. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 29.03, 20.04 (Vernon 2011).
After preparation of a pretrial sentence investigation, the trial court assessed
punishment at 18 years’ confinement, 8 years’ confinement, 6 years’ confinement,
and 8 years’ confinement, to run concurrently. Appellant filed timely notices 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 appeals are 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. 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 discusses the
evidence adduced at the trial, supplies us with references to the record, and
provides us with citation to legal authorities. 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, 154 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no
pet.).
Here, counsel’s brief reflects that he delivered a copy of the brief to
appellant and informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file
a response. See id. at 408. Appellant has not filed a pro se response.
2
We have independently reviewed the entire record, and we conclude that no
reversible error exists in the record, that there are no arguable grounds for review,
and that therefore the appeals are frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct.
at 1400; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (explaining
that frivolity is determined by considering whether there are “arguable grounds”
for review); Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826-27 (emphasizing that reviewing court—
and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether the
appeal is wholly frivolous); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155. 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 827 & n.6.
We affirm the judgments of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw. 1 Attorney, Cedrick L. Muhammad, must immediately send the notice
required 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
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 Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005).
3
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Brown.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4