Ryan Rydell Bonner v. The State of Texas Appeal from 122nd District Court of Galveston County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Motion Granted; Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 10, 2022. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-21-00286-CR RYAN RYDELL BONNER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 122nd District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 19-CR-1881 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant appeals his conviction for retaliation. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly 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 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). On December 1, 2021, appellant filed a pro se response to counsel’s brief. We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and appellant’s pro se response and agree the appeal is wholly 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). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Wise, Poissant and Wilson. Do Not Publish — Tex.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.
