Elias James Murrell v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 297th District Court of Tarrant County (majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-10-00517-CR Elias James Murrell of Tarrant County (1103962D) § November 15, 2012 § The State of Texas From the 297th District Court § v. § Opinion by Justice Meier § (nfp) JUDGMENT This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there was no error in the trial court s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS By_________________________________ Justice Bill Meier COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-10-00517-CR ELIAS JAMES MURRELL APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------FROM THE 297TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ---------A jury convicted Appellant Elias James Murrell of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and assessed his punishment at nineteen years confinement. Murrell s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel avers that in his professional opinion, the appeal is frivolous. Counsel s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. 2 the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. See 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). This court informed Murrell that he may file a pro se brief, and he did so. The State declined to submit a brief in response to the Anders brief or to Murrell s brief. Once an appellant s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922 23 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may we grant counsel s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82 83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988). We have carefully reviewed the record, Murrell s brief, and counsel s brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court s judgment. BILL MEIER JUSTICE PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; MEIER and GABRIEL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) 3 DELIVERED: November 15, 2012 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.
