RALPH EDWARD HARDEN JR v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, El Paso.

RALPH EDWARD HARDEN, JR., Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

No. 08-16-00248-CR

Decided: June 30, 2017

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ralph Edward Harden, Jr. appeals his convictions of aggravated sexual assault of a child (Count I) and indecency with a child (Count III). Appellant entered a plea of guilty before a jury to Counts I and III, and the trial court conducted a unitary proceeding.1 TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN. art. 26.14 (West 2009); see Frame v. State, 615 S.W.2d 766, 767 (Tex.Crim.App. 1981). The jury found Appellant guilty of both counts, and it assessed his punishment at imprisonment for a term of fifty-six years on Count I, and twenty years on Count II. 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. State of 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, 406 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). We granted Appellant's motion for access to the appellate record and provided him with a copy of the record. Appellant 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.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The State dismissed Counts II and IV.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice