CourtListener 9435634•Sherman Dewayne Griffin III v. the State of Texas
Sherman Dewayne Griffin III v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 9435634Txctapp9Oct 25, 2023
Full text
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
________________
NO. 09-23-00074-CR
________________
SHERMAN DEWAYNE GRIFFIN III, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 435th District Court
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 22-02-01601-CR
________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Sherman Griffin was convicted of murder, a first-degree felony. See Tex.
Penal Code Ann. § 19.02(c). The trial court sentenced Griffin to 75 years in the
Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. We affirm.
Griffin’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s
professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous; he then
filed a motion to withdraw as counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
1
(1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We notified Griffin
of his right to file a pro se brief and notified him of the deadline for doing so, but we
received no response from him. The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that we
need not address the merits of issues raised in an Anders brief. Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate court may
determine: (1) “that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining
that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error[;]” or (2) “that arguable
grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel
may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id.
We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s
conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it
unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm the
trial court’s judgment.1
AFFIRMED.
JAY WRIGHT
Justice
Submitted on October 13, 2023
Opinion Delivered October 25, 2023
Do Not Publish
Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.
1
Griffin may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
2
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.