eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2023-04

Rodrick Deshion Steele Jr. v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  •              In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-21-00143-CR
No. 02-21-00144-CR
___________________________
RODRICK DESHION STEELE JR., Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from 396th District Court
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 1523899D, 1523904D
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Rodrick Deshion Steele, Jr. appeals the trial court’s judgments for
two convictions of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See
    Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02
    (a)(2). Steele was originally placed on deferred-adjudication community
supervision for both offenses. The State filed petitions to adjudicate him guilty, and
Steele pleaded “not true” to the allegations in the State’s petitions. Following a
hearing, the trial court adjudicated Steele guilty and assessed his punishment at 12
years in prison for each offense, to be served concurrently.
Upon reviewing the records and concluding that no arguable grounds for
appeal exist, Steele’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. See Anders v. California,
    386 U.S. 738
    ,
744–45,
    87 S. Ct. 1396
    , 1400 (1967).            Counsel’s brief and motion meet the
requirements of Anders; counsel has presented a professional evaluation of the entire
record in each case demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.
    Id.,
    87 S. Ct. at 1400
    . We have independently examined the records, as is our duty upon
the filing of an Anders brief. 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.);
see also Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 82–83, 
    109 S. Ct. 346
    , 351 (1988). Steele filed a pro
se response, but his response did not show any arguable grounds for appeal. The
State agreed with appointed appellate counsel’s assessment that no meritorious
grounds for appeal exist and declined to file a brief.
2
After carefully reviewing the records and counsel’s brief, we agree with counsel
that these appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Our independent review of
the records reveals nothing further that might arguably support the appeals. 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). We grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/s/ Bonnie Sudderth
Bonnie Sudderth
Chief Justice
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: April 27, 2023
3

                                
    •