Frederick Johnson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-06-0316-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B FEBRUARY 7, 2007 ______________________________ FREDERICK JOHNSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 2006-411,658; HON. CECIL G. PURYEAR, PRESIDING _______________________________ Memorandum Opinion _______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Frederick Johnson (appellant) appeals from a judgment under which he was convicted of failure to stop and render aid. Appellant s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief, representing to us that she believed the appeal was meritless and moved to withdraw.1 Appellant was then informed, by his counsel and this court in writing, of his right 1 An ders v. C alifornia, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S .Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). to review the record and file a pro se brief. The deadline by which he had to submit the pro se brief was January 29, 2007. To date, we have not received such a brief. We affirm. With regard to the Anders brief, appellant s counsel stated that she diligently reviewed the record and that, in her opinion, it reflected no reversible error. However, she did assert two arguable grounds of error. They concerned 1) the sufficiency of the evidence to support conviction and 2) ineffectiveness of trial counsel. Having compared these issues to the record and applicable law, counsel found them meritless. Furthermore, we conducted an independent review of the record and find that the record indicates that 1) appellant was properly indicted and represented by legal counsel, 2) legal counsel filed numerous motions in preparation of trial and 3) nothing of record indicated that appellant s counsel had not adequately prepared for trial. So too does the record contain evidence substantiating his guilt of the crime, and the punishment levied was within the range provided by statute. These circumstances lead us to conclude that no reversible error exists in this cause. Accordingly, counsel's motion to withdraw is granted, and the trial court's judgment is affirmed. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
