CURTIS DEWAYNE CRISS v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2010)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Lang

Curtis Dewayne Criss was convicted by a jury of capital murder and punishment of life imprisonment was assessed.   Criss's counsel on appeal filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in which he concludes the appeal is 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, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978).   Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to Criss, and Criss filed a pro se response.

Appellant filed a pro se response raising one issue.   However, a court of appeals is not required to review the merits of claims raised in a pro se response.   See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).   Rather, the Court's duty is to determine whether there are any arguable issues, and, if so, to remand the case to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to address those issues.  Id.

After reviewing counsel's brief and the record, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit.   We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE