Johnny Allen Jennings v. State ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued October 4, 2018.
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-17-00605-CR
    ———————————
    JOHNNY ALLEN JENNINGS, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 351st District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 1475819
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant, Johnny Allen Jennings, pleaded guilty to the offense of aggravated
    sexual assault of a disabled person and the trial court assessed his punishment at
    sixty-five years’ imprisonment. TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 22.021(a)(1)(A)(iii),
    (a)(2)(C) (West Supp. 2017). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
    Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along
    with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is
    without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    (1967).
    Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional
    evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal
    
    authority. 386 U.S. at 744
    , 87 S. Ct. at 1400; 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 she is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See
    Anders, 386 U.S. at 
    744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400
    ; Mitchell v. State, 
    193 S.W.3d 153
    , 155
    (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).
    We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we
    conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds
    for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 
    744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400
    (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–
    27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); 
    Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155
    (reviewing court
    determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that
    2
    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.
    We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to
    withdraw.1 Attorney Cheri Duncan must immediately send appellant the required
    notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P.
    6.5(c).
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland and Lloyd.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    1
    Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal
    and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of
    Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 
    956 S.W.2d 25
    , 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)
    (en banc).
    3