Ashlle Marie Sanchez v. State
11-16-00041-CR
| Tex. App. | Oct 13, 2016Background
- Appellant Ashlle Marie Sanchez was convicted by a jury of delivery of less than one gram of methamphetamine and sentenced to 18 months in a state jail facility.
- Court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders-style brief concluding the appeal is frivolous.
- Counsel provided Sanchez with the brief, the motion to withdraw, and sought pro se access; the clerk sent the appellate record to Sanchez on May 27, 2016.
- Sanchez was given extensions but did not file a pro se response to counsel’s brief.
- The court independently reviewed the record under Anders/Schulman procedures and found no reversible error.
- The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal, advising Sanchez of her right to file a petition for discretionary review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel properly moved to withdraw under Anders | Sanchez (through counsel) implicitly contended appointed counsel followed required procedures | State: no opposition; record shows proper compliance | Court: counsel complied with Anders/Schulman and related authorities; withdrawal granted |
| Whether appeal raises arguable grounds for reversal | Sanchez did not file pro se arguments despite access to the record | State argued no reversible error in trial record | Court: independent review found no reversible error; appeal frivolous |
| Whether remand for new counsel is required | Sanchez sought pro se access but not new counsel | State: remand unnecessary as no arguable issues identified | Court: no arguable grounds; remand not required |
| Notice of right to seek discretionary review | Sanchez may want further review | State: no objection to notification requirement | Court: advised Sanchez of right to file petition for discretionary review and required counsel to notify her of that right |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (standard for counsel seeking to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (procedural guidance for Anders-type brief in Texas)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (independent appellate review requirement and disposition options)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (clarifies appellate options after Anders brief)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (authority cited regarding counsel withdrawal procedures)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. Panel Op. 1978) (related precedent on appellate counsel duties)
- Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (precedent on appellate practice)
- Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969) (precedent cited on appellate withdrawal)
- Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005) (example of appellate counsel withdrawal practice)