Background
The State charged Javonte Davis in separate indictments with two counts of second-degree aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The cases were consolidated for trial, and a jury found Davis guilty of both offenses.
The jury assessed punishment at 14 years’ confinement in each case. The trial court imposed those sentences and ordered them to run concurrently. Davis appealed both convictions.
Davis’s court-appointed appellate attorney moved to withdraw and filed an Anders brief concluding that the appeals were frivolous and presented no arguably meritorious issues. Counsel certified that Davis received the motion and brief, was advised of his right to review the appellate record and file a pro se response, and was provided assistance in obtaining the record. Davis filed no pro se response.
The Court’s Holding
The Third Court of Appeals independently reviewed the record, including the trial proceedings and appellate counsel’s brief. It found no reversible error and agreed with counsel that the record presented no arguably meritorious grounds for review.
The court therefore held that the appeals were frivolous, affirmed both judgments of conviction, and granted appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw.
Key Takeaways
- An appellate court reviewing an Anders brief must independently examine the record for potentially meritorious grounds for appeal.
- The court found no reversible error or arguable ground for review in either consolidated appeal.
- Davis’s concurrent 14-year sentences for two aggravated assaults with a deadly weapon remain in effect.
Why It Matters
The memorandum opinion illustrates the procedure Texas appellate courts follow when appointed counsel concludes that a criminal appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s assessment does not end the inquiry; the court must independently review the record before affirming the convictions and permitting counsel to withdraw.