Jonathan Eugene Mitchell v. State ( 2020 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-19-00202-CR
JONATHAN EUGENE MITCHELL, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 276th District Court
Marion County, Texas
Trial Court No. F15085
Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
ORDER
Jonathan Eugene Mitchell entered open pleas of guilty to and was convicted of two counts
of aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court sentenced Mitchell to eight years’
imprisonment after a punishment hearing. Mitchell appeals.
Mitchell’s attorney has filed an appellate brief in which he concludes, after a review of the
record and the related law, that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief presents
arguable points of error, but after a discussion of the applicable law and facts, counsel has
concluded that these points do not present reversible error. The brief, thus, meets the requirements
of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1991).
As required by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511, we
have conducted our own investigation of the record to discover if there are arguable grounds for
appeal. We have identified arguable issues that require additional briefing, including whether the
trial court erred in failing to admonish Mitchell about the range of punishment prior to accepting
Mitchell’s plea of guilty and whether the trial court erred in finding that Mitchell’s plea was
knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered.
“When we identify issues that counsel on appeal should have addressed but did not, we
need not be able to say with certainty that those issues have merit; we need only say that the issues
warrant further development by counsel on appeal.” Wilson v. State, 40 S.W.3d 192, 200 (Tex.
App.—Texarkana 2001, order). In such a situation, we “must then guarantee appellant’s right to
counsel by ensuring that another attorney is appointed to represent appellant on appeal.” Stafford,
2
813 S.W.2d at 511 (citing Anders, 386 U.S. at 744). Accordingly, we grant current counsel’s
motion to withdraw, and we abate this case to the trial court for the appointment of new appellate
counsel. The appointment is to be made within ten days of the date of this order. Appellate counsel
is to address the issues presented here, as well as any other issues that warrant further development
on appeal.
A memorialization of the trial court’s appointment shall be entered into the record of this
case and presented to this Court in the form of a supplemental clerk’s record within ten days of the
date of appointment.
The current submission date of February 13, 2020, is hereby withdrawn. We will establish
a new briefing schedule upon our receipt of the supplemental clerk’s record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT
Date: February 14, 2020
3