Sylvester Kelly v. The State of TexasAppeal from 188th District Court of Gregg County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana No. 06-12-00141-CR SYLVESTER KELLY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 188th District Court Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 41,078-A Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley MEMORANDUM OPINION Sylvester Kelly was convicted of aggravated robbery and sentenced to fifty years imprisonment. Kelly s appellate counsel has filed a brief which discusses the record and reviews the proceedings in detail. After counsel s professional evaluation of the record, he has concluded there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. This meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981); and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel mailed a copy of the brief and a letter to Kelly on February 25, 2013, informing Kelly of his right to file a pro se response and his right to review the record of the trial proceedings in doing so. Kelly s brief was due to be filed in this Court on April 1, 2013. As of this date, no brief has been filed and no request for extension has been made. Counsel has also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the clerk s record and the reporter s record and find no genuinely arguable issue. See Halbert v. Michigan, 545 U.S. 605, 623 (2005). We, therefore, agree with counsel s assessment that no arguable issues support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 1 Bailey C. Moseley Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: April 25, 2013 April 26, 2013 Do Not Publish 1 Since we agree this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel s request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, appellant must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or appellant must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing or for en banc reconsideration was overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4. 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.
