Andre-Marco Nmn McIntosh v. State, 10-16-00152-CR

Andre-Marco McIntosh pled guilty, without a plea bargain, to two indictments charging Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child and was sentenced to life imprisonment on each count, sentences to run concurrently.
Punishment evidence was presented in a single hearing; both convictions and judgments were entered (trial court case nos. 15-22875 and 15-22876).
Appointed appellate counsel filed Anders briefs in both appeals, notified McIntosh of his rights, and McIntosh did not file a pro se response.
Counsel reviewed the record (pleas, waivers, indictments, punishment evidence, and sentences) and concluded there were no non-frivolous appellate issues; the court found counsel complied with Anders duties.
On review the court deemed the appeals wholly frivolous but identified an error: court costs were assessed in both judgments despite a single plea proceeding; the court modified one judgment to delete assessed costs and affirmed both judgments as modified.
Counsel’s motions to withdraw were granted; counsel must notify McIntosh of appellate-review rights and certify compliance with Tex. R. App. P. 48.4; no substitute counsel will be appointed for discretionary review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appointed counsel complied with Anders duties and whether appeals present non-frivolous issues	Counsel argues the record contains no non-frivolous issues after review	State argues counsel’s Anders brief is adequate and the appeals lack merit	Court held counsel performed required duties and appeals are wholly frivolous; affirmed judgments
Whether costs may be assessed in each conviction when multiple offenses were presented in a single plea proceeding	McIntosh did not directly challenge but error is raised by court review	State had relied on precedents available at briefing time; court acknowledged intervening authority	Court held assessing costs in each conviction was erroneous in this context and modified one judgment to delete assessed costs
Whether abatement for appointment of new counsel is required due to the costs issue	McIntosh did not argue for abatement	State and court relied on local precedent that abatement unnecessary	Court declined to abate and corrected the judgment by modification instead
Post-opinion procedural rights—withdrawal and preservation of right to seek discretionary review	Counsel sought to withdraw and informed McIntosh of rights	State did not oppose withdrawal; no substitute counsel appointed	Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, ordered client notice and counsel certification, and explained PDR procedures and deadlines

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (standards for appointed counsel to withdraw on appeal when no meritorious issues exist)
McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429 (1988) (defines frivolous arguments as those that cannot conceivably persuade the court)
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (requirements for appellate counsel performance under Anders)
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (distinguishes frivolous from arguable grounds on appeal)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (procedures and protections when appellate counsel seeks to withdraw under Anders)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (court may independently review the record to determine whether an Anders appeal is frivolous)
Ferguson v. State, 435 S.W.3d 291 (Tex. App.—Waco 2014) (abatement for appointment of new counsel not required in similar circumstances)