WALTER SAM v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2017)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Walter R. Sam appeals his conviction for murder. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 19.02 (West 2011). Appellant's appointed counsel filed 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), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

Copies of counsel's brief and the record on appeal were delivered to appellant. Appellant filed a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel's brief, and appellant's pro se response and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM