Leroy Robinson, Jr. v. State, 10-15-00031-CR

Appellant Leroy Robinson, Jr. was convicted by a jury of: (1) possession of a penalty-group 1 controlled substance (less than one gram) and (2) obstruction/retaliation; punishments assessed were 19 months in state jail and 18 years' imprisonment, respectively.
Appellant was represented on appeal by court-appointed counsel who concluded there were no arguable grounds for appeal and filed Anders-compliant briefs and motions to withdraw in both causes.
Counsel certified compliance with procedural requirements: record review, service of the briefs and motions to withdraw on Robinson, and advising Robinson of his right to access the record and file a pro se response; counsel also provided Robinson copies of the clerk’s and reporter’s records per Kelly v. State.
Robinson did not file a pro se response after being given opportunity and time to do so.
The Court of Appeals conducted a full review of the record and the Anders briefs as required and found no reversible error; it affirmed the trial court judgments and granted counsel’s motions to withdraw.
The court ordered counsel to send Robinson a copy of the opinion and judgments and to advise him of his right to seek discretionary review; no substitute counsel will be appointed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appellate counsel complied with Anders procedural requirements	Robinson (through appointed counsel) claims counsel reviewed the record and found no arguable issues; counsel served documents and notified Robinson of rights	State argues counsel complied with Anders and related Texas requirements	Court held counsel met Anders and Texas requirements; no arguable grounds for appeal found
Whether the court must independently review the entire record under Anders/Penson	Robinson implicitly relies on counsel’s Anders brief and expects appellate review	State relies on precedent requiring courts to perform full review despite Anders brief	Court performed full review (Penson standard) and found no reversible error
Whether counsel may withdraw and whether appellant must be notified of further review rights	Robinson was informed and given record access; he did not respond	State supports counsel’s withdrawal and delivery of records/notice to appellant	Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and ordered counsel to send opinion and advise Robinson of right to seek discretionary review

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (appointed counsel must file a brief indicating an appeal is frivolous and request permission to withdraw)
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (appellate court must conduct an independent review of the entire record when counsel files an Anders brief)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (Texas guidance on contents of an Anders brief and procedures for appointed counsel)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (noting appellate courts meet procedural requirements by stating they considered issues raised and reviewed the record for reversible error)
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (procedural expectations for counsel when seeking withdrawal)
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (discussing counsel's duties in Anders situations)
Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (requirements for providing appellant access to appellate records)
Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (addressing procedures when counsel withdraws after finding appeal frivolous)