Steven Lee Merrill v. State, 06-17-00005-CR

Steven Lee Merrill was indicted for online solicitation of a minor and pled guilty without a plea agreement; the trial court adjudged guilt and sentenced him to seven years’ confinement.
Court‑appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding no meritorious appellate issues and moved to withdraw; Merrill was notified and did not file a pro se response.
The Sixth Court of Appeals conducted an independent review of the entire record and determined the appeal was frivolous under Anders.
The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirmed the trial court’s judgment as modified.
The court identified and struck a wrongful $100 “Child Abuse Prevention” court‑costs assessment because statute authorizes that fee only for convictions under specified statutes different from the statute under which Merrill was convicted.
Two other minor cost entries (judicial support fee and jury reimbursement) appeared transposed ($4 vs. $6) but resulted in no net increase; the court declined to adjust those items.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appellate counsel complied with Anders and whether appeal is frivolous	Merrill implicitly argued nothing (no pro se response filed)	Counsel argued no nonfrivolous issues; record review shows no arguable issues	Court agreed appeal is frivolous under Anders and independently reviewed record; affirmed judgment
Whether counsel may be permitted to withdraw on appeal	Merrill did not oppose (no response)	State supported withdrawal after Anders brief	Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw; no substitute appointed
Whether $100 “Child Abuse Prevention” fee was properly assessed	Merrill argued fee improper (court struck it)	State originally included the fee in costs	Court struck the $100 fee because statute applies only to specified offenses, not to convictions under §33.021
Whether $4 and $6 cost items were erroneous and require adjustment	Merrill challenged irregularity	State maintained total was unchanged and defendant not harmed	Court found items transposed but no net increase; no adjustment required

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (constitutional requirements for appointed counsel who finds appeal frivolous)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App.) (Anders procedure in Texas)
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App.) (standards for appellate review when counsel seeks to withdraw)
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.) (procedural guidance on counsel withdrawal)
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App.) (independent appellate review for frivolous appeals)
Ballinger v. State, 405 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. App.—Tyler) (modifying judgments to correct assessed costs)
Reyes v. State, 324 S.W.3d 865 (Tex. App.—Amarillo) (correcting clerical/cost errors by modification)