Henry Molina v. State, 13-12-00189-CR

Henry Molina was indicted for causing bodily injury to a child (third-degree felony enhanced to second-degree by a prior felony). He pleaded not guilty and was tried by jury.
Jury found Molina guilty; he pleaded true to an enhancement (prior burglary conviction) and received five years' imprisonment.
Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and motion to withdraw, stating no arguable appellate issues after reviewing the record.
Counsel identified three potential issues he considered but did not press: sufficiency of the evidence, admissibility of a 911-call recording, and ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
The court independently reviewed the entire record under Anders/Penson procedures, found no reversible error, affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Counsel was ordered to notify Molina of the opinion and his right to file a petition for discretionary review; no substitute counsel was appointed.

Issue	Molina's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Record insufficient to support conviction	Evidence supports conviction	Court found no reversible error; conviction affirmed
Admissibility of 911 recording	Recording improperly admitted	Admission was proper (or not reversible)	Court found no reversible error regarding evidence admission
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Trial counsel provided constitutionally deficient representation	Counsel’s performance was not shown to be prejudicial	Court found no reversible error; no merit to ineffective-assistance claim
Counsel's withdrawal under Anders	Counsel argued appeal is frivolous and sought withdrawal after filing Anders brief	State did not oppose withdrawal	Court granted motion to withdraw and directed counsel to notify Molina of PDR rights

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure when appointed counsel finds appeal frivolous)
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (U.S. 1988) (obligation of appellate court to review record after Anders brief)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (Texas guidance on content of Anders brief and pro se responses)
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requirements when counsel finds no arguable appeal)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (Anders-review confirmation on appeal)
High v. State, 507 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) (procedure for counsel’s explanation of lack of reversible error)
Jeffery v. State, 903 S.W.2d 776 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995) (procedural discussion supporting withdrawal when appeal frivolous)
Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (procedural requirements when counsel withdraws on Anders grounds)