Affirmed and Opinion Filed December 7, 2017
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-16-00560-CR
No. 05-16-00561-CR
No. 05-16-00562-CR
No. 05-16-00563-CR
MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. F08-57650-U, F14-70586-U, F14-70971-U, F14-75674-U
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Myers, and Schenck
Opinion by Justice Bridges
Appellant Mercedes M. Biggurs appeals her convictions, following the adjudication of
her guilt, for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, theft of property valued at $1,500 or
more but less than $20,000, and two injury to a child offenses. The trial court assessed
punishment at two years’ confinement in state jail for the theft conviction, ten years’
imprisonment for each injury to a child conviction, and fifteen years’ imprisonment for the
aggravated robbery conviction. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she
concludes the appeals are 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, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets
requirements of Anders). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised
appellant of her right to file a pro se response, but she did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v.
State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se
response to Anders brief filed by counsel).
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 appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably
support the appeals.
We affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/David L. Bridges/
DAVID L. BRIDGES
JUSTICE
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
160560F.U05
–2–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00560-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F08-57650-U.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2017.
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00561-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F14-70586-U.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2017.
–4–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00562-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F14-70971-U.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2017.
–5–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
MERCEDES M. BIGGURS, Appellant On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District
Court, Dallas County, Texas
No. 05-16-00563-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F14-75674-U.
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Schenck participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered December 7, 2017.
–6–