Daniel Tran Nguyen v. State, 10-17-00033-CR

Daniel Tran Nguyen pled guilty, without a plea bargain, to two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in a single hearing.
After a presentence investigation, the trial court sentenced Nguyen to 19 years (case no. 16-23417) and 8 years (case no. 15-23045), to run concurrently.
Appointed appellate counsel filed Anders briefs in both appeals, concluding no non-frivolous issues existed and moved to withdraw.
Nguyen was informed of his rights to the record and to file a pro se response or request the record; he made no request and filed no pro se response.
The court reviewed the entire record, agreed the appeals were wholly frivolous, but identified an error: duplicate assessment of court costs when multiple offenses were disposed of in a single proceeding.
The court modified one judgment to delete the assessed court costs, affirmed both judgments (one as modified), granted counsel's motion to withdraw, and advised Nguyen of PDR options (no substitute counsel appointed).

Issue	Nguyen's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether appointed counsel satisfied Anders duties and whether appeals are frivolous	Counsel complied with Anders; no non-frivolous issues to raise	Counsel performed required review; appeals are frivolous	Court held counsel complied with Anders and the appeals are wholly frivolous and affirmed
Whether court erred by assessing court costs in each conviction from a single plea proceeding	Costs were improperly assessed in both judgments	State did not contest harmlessness; court recognized precedent requiring correction	Court modified one judgment to delete assessed court costs and affirmed as modified
Whether abatement or appointment of new counsel required to address the cost error	Nguyen (if argued) might seek further advocacy	Precedent: abatement/appointment not required in similar circumstances	Court declined abatement/new counsel and corrected judgment itself
Whether appellate counsel must notify defendant and file Rule 48.4 certification upon withdrawal	Nguyen's right to notice and to seek PDR	Counsel must provide decision copy, advise re PDR, and certify compliance	Court granted withdrawal but required counsel to perform Rule 48.4 duties and notify Nguyen of PDR rights

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requires counsel to file brief identifying any possible appellate issues and to request permission to withdraw when case is frivolous)
McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429 (1988) (defines frivolous appeals as those lacking any basis in law or fact)
Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (procedures for providing the record to appellants in Anders context)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (appellate counsel withdrawal procedures and duties to inform defendant)
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (standards on counsel performance in Anders-type representation)
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (distinguishing frivolous appeals from those presenting arguable grounds)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (court may determine appeals are frivolous after full review)
Ferguson v. State, 435 S.W.3d 291 (Tex. App.—Waco 2014) (holding abatement for new counsel not required to correct cost-assessment errors)