Background

• Appellant was indicted for driving while intoxicated and evading arrest, both third-degree felonies; he pleaded guilty to the offenses and true to the enhancements, and the case proceeded to a jury trial on punishment.
• Off-duty State Trooper Chad Wilson observed a vehicle driving slowly and erratically on a major highway; he relayed observations to Trooper John Henley, who then stopped the vehicle.
• Appellant failed standardized field sobriety tests; he asked to be let go and prevented Henley from applying handcuffs; a struggle ensued as officers attempted to arrest him.
• Appellant fled in his vehicle, with Trooper Wilson attempting to remove keys; he drove at high speed, avoided capture, and endangered officers and others.
• Eventually, Appellant crashed and was subdued; inventory of the vehicle revealed gin and juice; defense evidence showed sobriety since the incident, and he testified about a long criminal history and drinking problems; sentencing was five years imprisonment and a $5,000 fine for DWI and seven years imprisonment with a $5,000 fine for evading arrest.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedural framework for Anders brief in criminal appeals)
• Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969) (requirements for brief and withdrawal under Anders)
• High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (controls on reviewing Anders briefs)
• In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (origination of procedure after counsel withdrawal)
• Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (compliance with notice and procedures under Kelly)
• Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (standards for reviewing Anders-related withdrawals)