Samuel Lane McKnight v. The State of Texas Appeal from 124th 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. 06-17-00039-CR SAMUEL LANE MCKNIGHT, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 124th District Court Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 43053-B Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION In 2016, the State moved to revoke Samuel Lane McKnight’s community supervision1 and to proceed to an adjudication of his guilt, alleging nine distinct violations of McKnight’s community supervision. McKnight pled true to four of the allegations, and the trial court granted the State’s motion. McKnight was sentenced to twelve years’ incarceration. McKnight appeals. McKnight’s appellate attorney filed a brief setting out the procedural history of the case, summarizing the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceedings, and concluding that the appellate record presents no arguable grounds to be raised on appeal. Meeting the requirements of Anders v. California, counsel has provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no plausible appellate issues to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743–44 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. Counsel forwarded copies of his brief and motion to withdraw to McKnight and informed him of his rights to review the appellate record and to file a pro se response to counsel’s brief, should he so desire. Additionally, counsel provided McKnight with a complete copy of the appellate record in this matter. McKnight was advised that his pro se response was due on or 1 In 2014, McKnight, pursuant to a plea agreement, had pled guilty to sexual assault of a child and had been placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for a period of ten years. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.011(a)(2) (West 2011). 2 before October 5, 2017. We received neither a pro se response from McKnight nor a motion requesting an extension of time in which to file such a response. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the entire appellate record and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial court’s judgment. Id. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.2 Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: November 9, 2017 November 10, 2017 Do Not Publish Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel’s request to withdraw from further representation of McKnight in this case. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should McKnight desire to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from either the date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3, and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4. 2 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.
