Adrian Simon v. The State of Texas Appeal from 228th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued November 17, 2015 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-14-00373-CR ——————————— ADRIAN SIMON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 228th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1406854 MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted appellant Adrian Simon of the offense of aggravated assault of a family member. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02 (West 2011). After he pleaded true to enhancement paragraphs, the jury assessed his punishment at imprisonment for life. See id. § 12.42(c)(1) (West 2011) (providing punishment range for repeat and habitual felony offender convicted of first-degree felony with prior first-degree felony convictions); § 22.02(b)(1) (providing that aggravated assault of family member is first degree felony). Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal authority. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that she has thoroughly reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). Counsel has also informed us that she delivered a copy of the appellate record and the brief to appellant and informed of his right to file a response. See In re Shulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (holding that appellate counsel who files Anders brief 2 must “take concrete measures to initiate and facilitate the process of actuating his client’s right to review the appellate record, if that is what the client wishes”). In his pro se response, appellant argues, among other things, that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, and that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the knife allegedly used in the assault. We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6. 3 We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 1 Attorney Angela Cameron must immediately send appellant the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Massengale, and Lloyd. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (per curiam). 4
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.
