Background
A grand jury indicted DeMarcus Malik Rousser for evading arrest or detention, a third-degree felony. Rousser entered an open guilty plea and waived a jury trial.
After a presentence investigation and hearing, the trial court sentenced Rousser to eight years in prison. His appointed appellate attorney filed an Anders brief stating that review of the record and applicable law revealed no arguable ground for reversal. The court gave Rousser additional time to file a pro se brief, but he did not respond.
The Court’s Holding
The Texas Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment. Applying the procedure required when appointed counsel files an Anders brief, the court independently examined the entire record and counsel’s submission.
The court found nothing in the record that would arguably support an appeal. Because it identified no nonfrivolous issue, the court concluded that appointing new counsel to rebrief the case was unnecessary.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court receiving an Anders brief must independently examine the record to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.
- The court found no arguable ground for challenging Rousser’s conviction or eight-year sentence.
- The absence of any potentially meritorious issue meant that new appellate counsel did not need to be appointed.
Why It Matters
The opinion illustrates the reviewing court’s independent responsibility in an Anders appeal: counsel’s assessment that an appeal lacks merit does not end the inquiry. The court must examine the record itself before affirming without further briefing.
Here, that review produced no arguable appellate issue, leaving the conviction and eight-year prison sentence in place.