Background
Chad Haynes appealed three Denton County judgments convicting him of evading arrest and two counts of accident involving personal injury. The appeals were originally filed in the Second Court of Appeals and transferred to the Seventh Court of Appeals through the Texas Supreme Court’s docket-equalization process.
Haynes’s court-appointed appellate counsel moved to withdraw and filed an Anders brief stating that a conscientious review of the record revealed no reversible error. Counsel supplied Haynes with the motion, brief, and appellate record and advised him of his right to respond. Haynes filed a pro se response; the State filed no brief.
The Court’s Holding
The court independently reviewed the appellate record, counsel’s Anders brief, and Haynes’s pro se response. It found no nonfrivolous issue preserved in the trial court that could support an appeal and no ground for appellate review that would result in reversal of the convictions or sentences.
The court therefore granted appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirmed all three trial-court judgments.
Key Takeaways
- An Anders filing does not end the appellate inquiry; the court independently examines the record for potentially nonfrivolous issues.
- The court considered both appointed counsel’s brief and Haynes’s pro se response before concluding that no reversible ground existed.
- The court affirmed the judgments for evading arrest and two counts of accident involving personal injury and permitted appointed counsel to withdraw.
Why It Matters
The opinion illustrates the procedure Texas appellate courts follow when appointed counsel concludes that a criminal appeal is frivolous. Counsel must identify and discuss potential issues, notify the appellant of the right to respond, and provide access to the relevant materials, while the appellate court must conduct its own review.
Here, that independent review produced no arguable issue warranting further appellate proceedings, leaving all three convictions and sentences intact.