Todd Richard Warren v. State, 07-15-00022-CR

Appellant Todd Richard Warren pleaded guilty to aggravated assault on a public servant with an agreed cap of 20 years' confinement; no plea recommendation as to punishment.
The trial court held a bench trial on punishment and sentenced Warren to 18 years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.
Retained appellate counsel concluded there were no non-frivolous issues and filed a motion to withdraw with an Anders-style brief asserting the appeal was frivolous.
Counsel complied with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5 by notifying Warren of the motion, providing contact information, disclosing deadlines, and informing him of his rights; Warren did not respond or file for record access.
The court noted Anders procedural safeguards typically apply to appointed counsel but retained counsel have an ethical duty to refuse frivolous appeals and must seek leave to withdraw when appropriate.
The court conducted an independent review of the record, found no arguable grounds for reversal, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, affirmed the trial court’s judgment, and directed counsel to notify Warren of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether retained counsel may move to withdraw on grounds the appeal is frivolous	Warren (through counsel) asserted no non-frivolous grounds exist; counsel sought leave to withdraw	State argued nothing preventing withdrawal if Rule 6.5 requirements met	Court granted withdrawal: retained counsel may withdraw if they comply with Rule 6.5 and ethical obligations
Whether Anders safeguards apply to retained counsel	Warren’s counsel treated the appeal as frivolous and followed Anders-style procedures	State argued Anders primarily protects defendants with appointed counsel, but retained counsel still must not pursue frivolous appeals	Court noted Anders safeguards do not strictly apply to retained counsel but retained counsel must inform court and comply with Rule 6.5; independent review is appropriate
Whether appellate record contained arguable grounds for reversal	Warren implicitly argued none exist via counsel’s brief	State maintained the record supported affirmation	Court’s independent review found no arguable issue warranting reversal; affirmed conviction and sentence
Whether appellant must respond to counsel’s motion to withdraw to preserve appeal	Warren did not respond or seek record access	State noted no rule requires retention of frivolous appeals due solely to appellant’s lack of response	Court held lack of response does not mandate keeping the appeal; still performed independent review and affirmed

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedures for appointed counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
Nguyen v. State, 11 S.W.3d 376 (Tex. App. 2000) (Anders procedural safeguards do not apply the same way to retained counsel)
Torres v. State, 271 S.W.3d 872 (Tex. App. 2008) (retained counsel must inform the appellate court and seek leave to withdraw in compliance with Rule 6.5)
Lopez v. State, 283 S.W.3d 479 (Tex. App. 2009) (retained counsel provides the protections Anders was intended to ensure)
Rivera v. State, 130 S.W.3d 454 (Tex. App. 2004) (ethical duty of counsel to refuse to pursue frivolous appeals)