Miguel Angel Saenz v. The State of Texas Appeal from 405th District Court of Galveston County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 19, 2017. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00478-CR NO. 14-16-00479-CR MIGUEL ANGEL SAENZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 405th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 14-CR-3080 & 14-CR-3117 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant entered a pleas of guilty to two counts of aggravated robbery. After a punishment hearing, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for 40 years on one offense, and 30 years on the other offense with the sentences to run concurrently. Appellant appealed. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). At appellant’s request, the record was provided to him. On May 26, 2017, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief. We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s response, and agree the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jewell. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 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.
