Blake Joseph Smith v. State ( 2010 )

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 9, 2010.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-09-00829-CR

NO. 14-09-00830-CR

____________

BLAKE JOSEPH SMITH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 1199071 & 1199376

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant plead guilty, without an agreement on punishment, to two charges of aggravated robbery.  After a pre-sentence investigation, on September 16, 2009, the trial court sentenced appellant in each case to confinement for forty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and entered a deadly weapon finding in each case. Appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, which was denied after a hearing on November 23, 2009.  Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal in each case.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which she concludes these appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991).  On August 23, 2010, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.

We have carefully reviewed the records, counsel=s brief, and appellant’s response, and we agree that these appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justice Yates and Sullivan.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).