Manuel Wayne Hogan v. State
12-16-00062-CR
| Tex. App. | May 24, 2017Background
- Manuel Wayne Hogan was indicted for evading arrest or detention, pleaded not guilty, and was convicted by a jury.
- Hogan pleaded true to two felony enhancement paragraphs; the jury assessed punishment at 25 years' imprisonment.
- Appellant’s counsel filed an Anders/Gainous brief concluding no arguable grounds for appeal after review of the record.
- This Court conducted an independent review of the record, found no reversible error, and considered counsel’s motion to withdraw.
- The Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, affirmed the trial-court judgment, and instructed counsel to notify Hogan of his right to seek discretionary review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel complied with Anders/Gainous and properly identified no arguable issues | Counsel (on behalf of Hogan) contended he reviewed the record and found no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal | The State argued the Anders brief and record review were sufficient and no reversible error existed | Court held counsel complied with Anders/Gainous; brief provided professional evaluation and no arguable grounds were found |
| Whether any reversible error exists in the trial record | Hogan (through counsel) raised no specific substantive appellate complaints | State maintained the record reveals no reversible error | Court’s independent review found no reversible error and affirmed the conviction |
| Whether counsel may be permitted to withdraw under Anders procedure | Counsel moved to withdraw based on his Anders/Gainous assessment | State did not oppose withdrawal given compliance with procedure | Court granted counsel leave to withdraw after considering the merits |
| Whether appellant was properly informed of rights to seek further review | Counsel certified he provided Hogan a copy of the brief and time to file a pro se brief (none filed) | State noted procedural requirements for discretionary review notification | Court required counsel to send opinion/judgment to Hogan and advise of right/timelines to file a petition for discretionary review |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requires counsel to file a brief identifying any non-frivolous grounds and permits withdrawal if none exist)
- Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969) (Texas application of Anders principles)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (describing appellate court review of counsel’s Anders brief)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (procedural guidance on Anders withdrawals)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (procedural requirements and counsel duties when filing Anders brief)