Hassan Abdul Worthy v. State
01-15-01029-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 22, 2016Background
- Hassan Abdul Worthy pleaded guilty to first‑degree murder (no agreed plea recommendation).
- Trial court sentenced Worthy to 45 years’ imprisonment.
- The trial‑court certification indicated this was not a plea bargain and Worthy retained the right to appeal.
- Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders motion to withdraw and brief concluding the appeal is frivolous and presents no reversible error.
- Worthy received notice materials but filed no pro se response or request for record access.
- The Court of Appeals independently reviewed the entire record, found no arguable grounds, affirmed the conviction, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and ordered counsel to notify Worthy of the result.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether any arguable grounds for appeal exist | Counsel: record contains no reversible error; appeal is frivolous | Worthy: filed no pro se response or specific complaints | Court: independent review shows no arguable grounds; appeal frivolous; affirmed |
| Whether Anders requirements were satisfied | Counsel: brief professionally evaluated record and cited authority | Worthy: raised no objection to counsel’s Anders compliance | Court: Anders requirements met |
| Whether Worthy had right to appeal despite guilty plea | State/trial certification: case not plea‑bargain; defendant has right to appeal | Worthy: did not dispute certification | Court: certification establishes right to appeal (procedural posture preserved) |
| Duties of appointed counsel after withdrawing | Counsel moved to withdraw and sought to comply with notification rules | Worthy: no argument presented on post‑withdrawal duties | Court: granted withdrawal and ordered counsel to immediately notify Worthy and file copy of notice |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedures when counsel seeks to withdraw on grounds appeal is frivolous)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (appellate counsel’s duty to evaluate record and cite authorities when filing Anders brief)
- Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (reviewing court determines whether counsel has presented arguable grounds)
- Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must decide whether arguable grounds for review exist)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (procedures for appellate review of Anders brief and availability of discretionary review)
- Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (counsel’s duty to inform client of appellate result and post‑appeal options)