Torrey Ladarius Gray v. the State of Texas
05-20-00118-CR
| Tex. App. | Jul 19, 2021Background:
- Torrey Ladarius Gray pleaded guilty (open pleas) to aggravated robbery (one cause) and aggravated assault on a public servant (three causes); the matters were tried together.
- At a January 23, 2020 hearing the trial court accepted the pleas, found Gray guilty, made deadly-weapon (firearm) findings, and sentenced Gray to 25 years’ confinement on each conviction, to run concurrently.
- Gray timely filed notices of appeal and pauper’s oaths; the trial court appointed appellate counsel.
- Appointed counsel filed Anders motions to withdraw and accompanying briefs in each appeal, stating a careful review of the clerk’s and reporter’s records revealed no arguable grounds; counsel attested he provided Gray the motions, briefs, and records and informed Gray of his right to file a pro se response.
- The Court of Appeals gave Gray an opportunity to file a pro se response; none was filed. The court independently reviewed the records and counsel’s briefs and concluded the appeals were frivolous.
- The court granted counsel’s motions to withdraw and affirmed the trial court judgments in the four appeals.
Issues:
| Issue | Gray's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of appointed counsel’s Anders filing | No pro se points; did not dispute counsel’s filing | Counsel complied with Anders: reviewed records, filed brief, provided records to Gray | Court: Anders filings were adequate |
| Appellate court’s duty to review | N/A (no challenge) | Court must independently review entire record after Anders filing | Court performed independent review |
| Right to file pro se response / notice given | Gray did not file a response | Appellate counsel and court provided notice and records; Gray’s right preserved | Court: Gray was notified and did not respond |
| Disposition remedy (withdrawal/affirmance) | No relief sought by Gray | Grant counsel’s motion to withdraw if appeal frivolous; affirm if no arguable error | Court granted withdrawal and affirmed judgments |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (permitting counsel to seek withdrawal when no arguable issues and requiring appellate independent review)
- Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (Texas precedent requiring independent appellate review after an Anders brief)
- Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (standards for abating appeals and appointing new counsel if Anders deficiencies exist)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (procedures and requirements for Anders-type filings in Texas)
- Crowe v. State, 595 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2020) (discussing Anders withdrawal and independent review practice)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (Anders brief must present a professional evaluation explaining lack of arguable grounds)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (appellant must be advised of and allowed opportunity to file a pro se response)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (appellate courts should review clerk’s and reporter’s records when addressing Anders briefs)