Frank Marinero v. The State of Texas Appeal from 338th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 30, 2017. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-16-00627-CR FRANK MARINERO, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 338th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1473241 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant appeals his conviction for murder. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by assigning issues that might arguably support the appeal, and explaining why those issues do not raise arguable error. See Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). 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 appeal is 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 judgment of the trial court is affirmed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Busby and Wise. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 2