We have carefully reviewed counsel's brief,9 Appellant's response, the State's brief, and the appellate record. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the appellate record that arguably might support this appeal.9 Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment. v. << (2011)

Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.

After an 5 6 appellant's court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record to see if there is any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf.5 Only then may we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.6 Contrary to the State's contention, its choice not to proceed on five other counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child is not evidence that 7 Appellant's guilty plea was made as part of a bargain. There is no evidence of an agreement in the record. The written plea admonishments and judgment both provide that there was no bargain and that Appellant entered an “open plea of guilty to the court with a PSI.” Neither the admonishments nor the judgment mentions that the State decided not to proceed on the remaining five counts. At sentencing, the trial court stated, “Now, this was an open plea, which basically means that there was no plea bargain on this case.” We therefore hold that this is an “open plea” case and reject the State's request that we dismiss the appeal based on Appellant's waiver of appeal.7 Because 8 Appellant entered an open plea of guilty, our independent review for potential error is limited to potential jurisdictional defects, the voluntariness of his plea, error that is not independent of and supports the judgment of guilt, and error occurring after entry of the guilty plea.8 We have carefully reviewed counsel's brief,9 Appellant's response, the State's brief, and the appellate record. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the appellate record that arguably might support this appeal.9 Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment.

NO. 02-09-00156-CR

Decided: February 11, 2011

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

Tex.R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: February 10, 2011

FOOTNOTES

FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.. FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.

FN2. 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967).. FN2. 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967).

FN3. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510-11 & n.3 (Tex.Crim.App.1991).. FN3. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510-11 & n.3 (Tex.Crim.App.1991).

FN4. See Salinas v. State, 163 S.W.3d 734, 740 (Tex.Crim.App.2005) (“In the majority of cases, the record on direct appeal is undeveloped and cannot adequately reflect the motives behind trial counsel's actions.”); Andrews v. State, 159 S.W.3d 98, 102 (Tex.Crim.App.2005) (indicating that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are normally best left for habeas corpus proceedings.).. FN4. See Salinas v. State, 163 S.W.3d 734, 740 (Tex.Crim.App.2005) (“In the majority of cases, the record on direct appeal is undeveloped and cannot adequately reflect the motives behind trial counsel's actions.”); Andrews v. State, 159 S.W.3d 98, 102 (Tex.Crim.App.2005) (indicating that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are normally best left for habeas corpus proceedings.).

FN5. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.. FN5. See Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511.

FN6. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 351 (1988).. FN6. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82-83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

FN7. See Ex parte Delaney, 207 S.W.3d 794, 798-99 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (holding waiver of appeal absent a bargain or recommended sentence is not valid for punishment phase because not made knowingly or voluntarily).. FN7. See Ex parte Delaney, 207 S.W.3d 794, 798-99 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (holding waiver of appeal absent a bargain or recommended sentence is not valid for punishment phase because not made knowingly or voluntarily).

FN8. See Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 620 (Tex.Crim.App.2003).. FN8. See Monreal v. State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 620 (Tex.Crim.App.2003).

FN9. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).. FN9. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network