Dave Shepherd v. The State of Texas Appeal from 182nd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 12, 2017. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00512-CR DAVE SHEPHERD, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 182nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1450885 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Dave Shepherd appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(1) (West 2011). Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by 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, 811–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was sent a copy of the appellate record, and he filed a pro se response to the brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se response and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. 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 judgment of the trial court is 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 Do Not Publish — Tex.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