Background
The State charged Javonte Davis in separate indictments with two counts of second-degree aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The cases were consolidated for trial, and a jury found Davis guilty of both offenses. The jury assessed 14 years’ confinement for each offense, and the trial court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.
Davis appealed both convictions. His court-appointed appellate attorney filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, concluding after reviewing the record that the appeals were frivolous and presented no arguably meritorious issues. Counsel certified that Davis received the brief and motion, was advised of his right to examine the record and file a pro se response, and received assistance for obtaining the record. Davis did not file a response.
The Court’s Holding
The Third Court of Appeals independently reviewed the trial record and appellate counsel’s brief, as required when counsel files an Anders brief. It found no reversible error and agreed with counsel that the record presented no arguably meritorious grounds for appellate review.
The court therefore affirmed both judgments of conviction and granted appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court must independently review the record before accepting appointed counsel’s conclusion that a criminal appeal is frivolous.
- The court found no reversible error or arguably meritorious issue concerning Davis’s two aggravated-assault convictions.
- Davis’s concurrent 14-year sentences remain in effect, and appellate counsel was permitted to withdraw.
Why It Matters
The memorandum opinion illustrates the procedure governing Anders appeals in Texas. Even when appointed counsel identifies no viable issue and the defendant files no pro se response, the appellate court must conduct its own examination of the record before affirming the convictions and allowing counsel to withdraw.