Case Information
*1 AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed February 25, 2015.
In The No. 05-13-01659-CR No. 05-13-01660-CR CHRISTOPHER EUGENE ADDISON, Appellant V.
On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. F06-63021-Q, F12-71987-Q MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Stoddart, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Lang
Christopher Eugene Addison appeals his convictions, following the adjudication of his guilt, for robbery and assault involving family violence. See T EX . P ENAL C ODE A NN . §§ 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2), 29.02(a) (West 2011); T F AM C ODE NN . §§ 71.0021, 71.005 (West
2008 & Supp. 2014). The trial court assessed punishment at five years’ imprisonment for the robbery and one year’s confinement in the county jail for the assault. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable *2 grounds to advance. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).
We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals.
We affirm the trial court’s judgments.
/ Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE Do Not Publish
T R. PP P. 47
131659F.U05