eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2019-01

James Steven Champion v. State ( 2019 )


Menu:
 
  •              In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-17-00234-CR
No. 02-17-00235-CR
___________________________
JAMES STEVEN CHAMPION, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 4
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 1480031D, 1465584D
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Gabriel and Bassel, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Gabriel
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In separate causes, the State charged appellant James Steven Champion with a
third-degree felony count of injury to a disabled individual (Cause No. 1465584D), see
Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.04(a)(3), (f) (West Supp. 2018), and a third-degree felony
count of assault involving family violence by impeding the normal breathing or
circulation of the blood (Cause No. 1480031D), see id. § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2)(B) (West
Supp. 2018). The State also alleged in both causes that Champion had a prior felony
conviction. Champion pleaded guilty to both offenses and true to the prior felony
allegations, and the jury assessed his punishment at twenty years’ confinement in both
causes. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.33(a) (West 2011), § 12.42(a) (West Supp.
2018) (enhancing the potential range of punishment for a third-degree felony to a
term of confinement not less than two years or more than twenty years where the
accused has a prior felony conviction). The trial court sentenced him accordingly and
ordered the sentences to run concurrently. Champion subsequently filed a notice of
appeal in each case.
Champion’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel, accompanied by an Anders brief in support of that motion. See Anders v.
California,
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967). In the brief, counsel states that in his professional
opinion, this appeal is frivolous and without merit. After Champion’s counsel filed
his motion to withdraw and Anders brief, we notified Champion and invited him to
file a pro se response. We granted Champion several extensions to file a response, yet
2
he never did so. The State has filed a letter stating it agrees with counsel’s conclusion
that the record reveals no arguable grounds for granting Champion relief.
Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the
ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we have an
obligation to undertake an independent examination of the record. See Stafford v. State,
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State,
    904 S.W.2d 920
    , 922–23
(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). In this evaluation, we consider the record,
the arguments raised in the Anders brief, and any issues the appellant points out in his
pro se response. See United States v. Wagner,
    158 F.3d 901
    , 902 (5th Cir. 1998); In re
Schulman,
    252 S.W.3d 403
    , 408–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel and the State that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find
nothing in the record that arguably might support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State,
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State,
    206 S.W.3d 684
    ,
685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw
and affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/s/ Lee Gabriel
Lee Gabriel
Justice
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: January 3, 2019
3