Philip Byrd v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 147th District Court of Travis County (majority)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00771-CR Philip Byrd, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 147TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-DC-10-202201, THE HONORABLE WILFORD FLOWERS, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Philip Byrd was convicted by a jury of theft, enhanced by two prior theft convictions. See Tex. Penal Code § 31.03(a), (e)(4)(d) (West 2011). The trial judge assessed Byrd s punishment at fifteen months confinement in a state jail facility.1 Byrd s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). 1 Byrd did not elect prior to trial for the jury to sentence him. See Tex. Code Crim Proc. Ann. art. 27.02(7), art. 37.07, § 2(b) (West 2006). Byrd received a copy of counsel s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No pro se brief or written response has been filed. We have reviewed the record, including appellate counsel s brief, and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. __________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Rose and Goodwin Affirmed Filed: November 8, 2011 Do Not Publish 2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.