MacArthur Isaiah Bargery v. the State of Texas

Opinion filed September 12, 2024

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________

No. 11-23-00259-CR
__________

MACARTHUR ISAIAH BARGERY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 161st District Court
Ector County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. B-22-0359-CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, MacArthur Isaiah Bargery, was charged by indictment with two
counts of aggravated robbery and one count of aggravated assault against a public
servant, each first-degree felonies, and one count of aggravated assault with a deadly
weapon,1 a second-degree felony. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial, pleaded

The indictment alleged two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, but the State
1

abandoned one count prior to Appellant’s guilty pleas.
guilty to all four offenses, and elected the trial court to assess his punishment. See
TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 22.01(b)(1), 22.02(a)(2) (West Supp. 2023), § 29.03
(West 2019); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 37.07 § 2 (West Supp. 2023).
At Appellant’s two-day punishment hearing before the trial court, the State
presented fifteen witnesses, photographs, surveillance video footage, dashcam
footage, a firearm, and Appellant’s recorded custodial confession. The record
reflects that Appellant entered two game rooms on the west side of Odessa in a ski
mask and hoodie, armed with a loaded handgun. Appellant shot the owner of the
first game room as he ran to his office, then went to the second game room where he
robbed a floor clerk at gunpoint. He fled each crime scene in a black car driven by
his codefendant, who led law enforcement on a high-speed car chase soon after the
second robbery. During the pursuit, Appellant leaned out of the passenger window
and fired “fifteen to twenty rounds” at the patrol unit closely following them. After
law enforcement lost sight of the vehicle, Appellant and the driver abandoned it, and
evaded on foot. Police found Appellant hiding in a dumpster, and found the firearm
in a separate dumpster in the same alley.
The trial court accepted Appellant’s pleas, found him guilty, and assessed
punishment for each conviction at confinement in the Correctional Institutions
Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for terms of: (1) thirty years
for aggravated robbery as alleged in Count One; (2) forty years for aggravated
robbery as alleged in Count Two; (3) forty years for aggravated assault against a
public servant as alleged in Count Three, in addition to a $10,000 fine; and (4) twenty
years for aggravated assault as alleged in Count Five. The trial court ordered the
sentences to run concurrently. See CRIM. PROC. art. 42.08(a) (West Supp. 2023).
Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this
court. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and
conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are
2
no arguable issues to present on appeal. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of
the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of both
the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. Counsel also advised Appellant of his
right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief, and of his right to
file a petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. As such, court-
appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re
Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813
S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Appellant has not filed a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following
the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed
the record, and we agree with counsel that no arguable grounds for appeal exist. 2
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the
judgments of the trial court.

JOHN M. BAILEY
CHIEF JUSTICE

September 12, 2024
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

2
Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure.
3