Joseph Duran v. State
01-16-00146-CR
| Tex. App. | Jan 12, 2017Background
- Joseph Duran pleaded guilty to murder under Texas Penal Code § 19.02(b) without a plea-bargained punishment recommendation; the trial court assessed punishment at 60 years’ imprisonment.
- Duran timely appealed his conviction and sentence.
- Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, stating the record contains no reversible error and the appeal is frivolous.
- The Court of Appeals conducted an independent review of the entire record, as required under Anders.
- The court concluded there were no arguable grounds for appeal, affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.
- The court instructed counsel to notify Duran of the result and his right to seek discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and to file proof of that notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellate counsel may withdraw under Anders after finding no non-frivolous issues | Counsel for Duran (on his behalf) contends no arguable grounds exist; requests withdrawal under Anders | State contends record shows no reversible error and supports allowing counsel to withdraw | Court permits withdrawal after independent review; Anders procedure satisfied |
| Whether the record contains reversible error warranting reversal | Duran argues (via counsel) no grounds for reversal; implicitly preserves right to seek review | State argues there is no reversible error and the conviction and sentence should be affirmed | Court independently reviewed record, found no reversible error, and affirmed judgment |
| Whether appellant must be notified of appellate result and right to seek discretionary review | Duran is entitled to notice of appellate outcome and PDR rights | State concurs that counsel must notify appellant and file proof | Court orders counsel to notify appellant and file copy of notice; informs appellant of right to seek discretionary review |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requires counsel to file brief identifying anything arguable and permits withdrawal only after court independently reviews the record)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (Anders-type review recognized under Texas law)
- Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (discusses counsel’s duties when filing an Anders brief)
- Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for appeal exist)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same; appellant may seek discretionary review if court finds no arguable grounds)
- Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (counsel must notify appellant of appellate outcome and right to seek further review)