Keller
v.
State

Court of Appeals For The First District of TexasJun 26, 2018
NO. 01-17-00472-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 26, 2018)

NO. 01-17-00472-CR

06-26-2018

REBECCA RENEE KELLER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 232nd District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1366268

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Rebecca Renee Keller, pleaded guilty without an agreed punishment recommendation to the offense of murder. See TEX. PENAL CODE § 19.02. Appellant was sentenced to sixty years' imprisonment. This sentence is within the applicable sentencing range. The trial court certified that this was not a plea-bargain case, and that appellant had the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.

See TEX. PENAL CODE § 19.02(c) (murder is first-degree felony); 12.32 (first-degree felony punishable by imprisonment from 5 to 99 years or life).

Appellant's appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along with an Anders brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and that, therefore, the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel's brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and supplying this Court with references to the record and legal authority. See id. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that she has thoroughly reviewed the record and that she is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Appellant's counsel has certified that she mailed appellant copies of the motion to withdraw, the Anders brief, and the appellate record; and informed appellant of her right to file a response. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellant did not file a pro se Anders response.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, that there are no arguable grounds for review, and that therefore the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (reviewing court is not to address merits of each claim raised in Anders brief or pro se response after determining there are no arguable grounds for review); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155. An appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 n.6.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(a). Attorney Inger H. Chandler must immediately send the required notice and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). --------

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Massengale and Brown. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).