Datron Smith v. State
06-16-00131-CR
| Tex. App. | Feb 16, 2017Background
- Datron Smith pled guilty to engaging in organized criminal activity by committing credit card fraud and proceeded to a bench trial on punishment.
- The trial court sentenced Smith to seven years’ incarceration.
- Appellant’s counsel filed an Anders brief concluding there were no meritorious issues and moved to withdraw, providing Smith the brief and notice of his appellate rights.
- Smith did not request the appellate record, file a pro se response, or seek an extension to file one.
- The Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record and determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous.
- The court affirmed the trial court’s judgment and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw; no substitute counsel was appointed and instructions were given for seeking further review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal presents any non-frivolous, arguable grounds | Smith did not file a response or identify grounds | Counsel argued, via Anders brief, that no meritorious issues exist | Court independently reviewed record and held the appeal is wholly frivolous |
| Whether counsel may withdraw under Anders after filing an Anders brief | N/A (appellant silent) | Counsel sought permission to withdraw, having complied with Anders requirements | Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw |
| Appropriate disposition where appeal is frivolous under Anders | N/A | Counsel asked for withdrawal and for affirmance/dismissal as appropriate | Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment and declined to appoint new counsel |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (requires counsel to file brief explaining why no non-frivolous issues exist and permits withdrawal if court agrees)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (Texas guidance on Anders procedures for appellate counsel)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (court’s independent review confirms frivolousness in Anders context)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (procedural standards for evaluating appellate issues)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (additional precedent on Anders-type evaluations)