Frankie Larez v. The State of Texas Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-21-00184-CR FRANKIE LAREZ, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 137th District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No. 2018-414,821, Honorable John J. “Trey” McClendon III, Presiding August 11, 2022 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. Before the Court is a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief. Frankie Larez appeals his conviction after a jury found him guilty of a lesser-included offense of possession of a controlled substance. The trial court then found true two prior felony enhancements and sentenced appellant to thirty years in prison. His motion for new trial was denied, and Larez perfected an appeal. Assigned appellate counsel for Larez filed an Anders brief and moved to withdraw.1 In his brief, counsel certified that, after a diligent search of the record, the appeal is without merit. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (discussing purpose and procedure of filing an Anders brief). Accompanying the brief is a copy of a letter sent by counsel to Larez informing him of counsel’s belief that there is no reversible error and of appellant’s right to file a pro se response to the motion to withdraw and Anders brief. So too did counsel provide appellant with a copy of the appellate record. By letter dated May 16, 2022, this Court notified appellant of his right to file his own brief or response by June 15, 2022, if he wished to do so. Larez responded on June 22, 2022, with (1) his motion to stay the appeal for an indefinite period of time and (2) objections to the Anders brief filed by his counsel. Through the former, he said he needed opportunity to conduct research on various constitutional issues. Through the latter, he questioned counsel’s representation of him and posed legal issues allegedly meriting attention on appeal. We denied his motion to indefinitely stay the appeal, but granted him an additional thirty days to file a further response. We also considered the argument within his objection to the Anders brief as a pro se response. Larez now has had more than five additional weeks to submit additional responses and arguments. None have been received. Nor has the Court received any other communication from him. In compliance with the requirements of Schulman and Anders, appellate counsel discussed four potential grounds for appeal and explained why none provided an arguable issue meriting consideration on appeal. The grounds discussed were: (1) the 1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). 2 denied motion to suppress, (2) a denied challenge for cause during jury selection, (3) the jury charge, and (4) the right to a public trial. Having conducted an independent review of the record to assess counsel’s conclusions and uncover arguable issues pursuant to In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 406 and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en banc), we arrive at the same conclusion as Larez’s appellate attorney. There is no arguable issue meriting consideration on appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. We further direct counsel to send Larez, within five days of this opinion, a copy of the opinion and judgment, along with notification of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4. In ordering that such notice be afforded Larez, we are not requiring appellate counsel to advise or otherwise represent Larez should a petition for review be desired. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 411 n.33. Per Curiam Do not publish. 3
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.
