BRODRICK JAROD HILL v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, El Paso.

BRODRICK JAROD HILL, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

No. 08-16-00339-CR

Decided: June 30, 2017

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Brodrick Jarod Hill appeals his conviction of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered an open plea of guilty. The court found Appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for a term of twenty years. We affirm.

FRIVOLOUS APPEAL

Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008)(“In Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance ‘arguable’ points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.”); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). Counsel has notified the Court in writing that he has delivered a copy of counsel's brief and the motion to withdraw to Appellant, and he has advised Appellant of his right to review the record, file a pro se brief, and to seek discretionary review. Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318-20 (Tex.Crim.App. 2014)(setting forth duties of counsel). Counsel also certified to the Court that he has provided Appellant with a form motion to obtain access to the appellate record. Appellant has not made any request to review the record and he has not filed a pro se brief.

After carefully reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice