CourtListener 10002198•Marcus Leshun Sargent v. the State of Texas
Marcus Leshun Sargent v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 10002198Txctapp1411 juil. 2024
Texte intégral
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 11, 2024
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-23-00079-CR
MARCUS LESHUN SARGENT, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 506th District Court
Grimes County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 18765
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child
under six years old. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which counsel
concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the
requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a
professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable
grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–13 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1978).
A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised
of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford
v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). On May 9, 2024, appellant
filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief.
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro
se response and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we
find no reversible error in the record. We are not to address the merits of each
claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined
there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,
827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Wilson.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
2
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.