In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-21-00306-CR
__________________
RAYMUNDO BERMUDEZ, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 14-18677
__________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Raymundo Bermudez appeals his conviction for assaulting a public
servant, a third-degree felony. 1 After filing the notice of appeal, the trial
court appointed an attorney to represent Bermudez in his appeal. The
attorney discharged his responsibilities to Bermudez by filing and Anders
1See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(b)(1).
1
brief. 2 In the brief, Bermudez’s attorney represents there are no arguable
reversible errors to be addressed in Bermudez’s appeal. 3 The brief the
attorney filed contains a professional evaluation of the record. In the
brief, Bermudez’s attorney explains why, under the record in Bermudez’s
case, no arguable issues exist to reverse the trial court’s judgment.4
Bermudez’s attorney also represented that he sent Bermudez a copy of
the brief and the record. When the brief was filed, the Clerk of the Ninth
Court of Appeals notified Bermudez, by letter, that he could file a pro se
brief or response with the Court on or before March 21, 2022. Bermudez,
however, failed to respond.
When an attorney files an Anders brief, we are required to
independently examine the record and determine whether the attorney
assigned to represent the defendant has a non-frivolous argument that
would support the appeal. 5 After reviewing the clerk’s record, the
reporter’s record, and the attorney’s brief, we agree there are no arguable
2See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).
3See id.; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
4Id.
5Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988) (citing Anders, 386 U.S. at
744).
2
grounds to support the appeal. Thus, it follows the appeal is frivolous.6
For that reason, we need not require the trial court to appoint another
attorney to re-brief the appeal. 7
The trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
_________________________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Submitted on September 14, 2022
Opinion Delivered September 28, 2022
Do Not Publish
Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
6See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005) (“Due to the nature of Anders briefs, by indicating in the opinion
that it considered the issues raised in the briefs and reviewed the record
for reversible error but found none, the court of appeals met the
requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1.”).
7See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Bermudez may challenge our decision in the case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
3