Gabriel Palacios v. State, 01-13-00944-CR

Gabriel Palacios was convicted by a jury of aggravated sexual assault of a child under 14 (first-degree) and indecency with a child by touching (second-degree) in consolidated trials.
The trial court sentenced Palacios to 25 years for aggravated sexual assault and 10 years for indecency with a child, to be served concurrently; both within statutory ranges.
Appellate counsel filed a combined Anders motion to withdraw and brief, concluding the appeals were frivolous after reviewing the records and citing legal authority.
Counsel provided Palacios with the Anders materials and copies of the records and informed him of his right to file a response; Palacios filed no response.
This Court independently reviewed the records, found no reversible error or arguable grounds for appeal, affirmed both judgments, and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial convictions or sentencing contain reversible error	Palacios did not present any specific challenge; no response filed	State argued convictions and sentences are valid and within range	Court found no reversible error and affirmed convictions and sentences
Whether appellate counsel complied with Anders procedures	N/A (appellant silent)	Counsel contended she performed a thorough, professional review and met Anders requirements	Court agreed counsel met Anders requirements and permitted withdrawal
Whether appellant was adequately informed and given record access for response	Palacios did not claim lack of notice or access	Counsel and court asserted appellant received notice and records to prepare a response	Court found appellant was properly informed and given records; no response was filed
Whether any arguable grounds for appeal exist	Palacios raised none on appeal	State maintained no arguable grounds exist after review	Court independently reviewed record and concluded no arguable grounds; appeals frivolous

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (requires counsel to briefly describe potential appellate issues and allows withdrawal if appeal is frivolous)
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (Anders-like counsel duties under Texas practice)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (procedural guidance on counsel’s duty to notify defendant when seeking to withdraw)
Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (court must ensure appellant receives records to prepare a response to counsel’s Anders brief)
Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must independently determine whether arguable grounds for appeal exist)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (counsel must advise client of appellate outcome and right to seek discretionary review)
Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (discusses counsel’s Anders review obligations)