Edward Lamoyne King v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 26th District Court of Williamson County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-12-00104-CR Edward Lamoyne King, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 26TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 10-1235-K26, HONORABLE BILLY RAY STUBBLEFIELD, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found appellant Edward Lamoyne King guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02(a)(2) (West 2011). After finding that appellant had at least two previous felony convictions, the jury assessed punishment at thirty-five years imprisonment. See id. § 12.42(d) (West 2011) (enhancing punishment to life or no less than twenty-five years imprisonment for felony conviction where defendant has previously been convicted of two sequential felonies). Appellant s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 86 87 (1988). Appellant received a copy of counsel s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We have not received a pro se brief from appellant. We have conducted an independent review of the record, including appellate counsel s brief, and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. __________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field Affirmed Filed: March 6, 2013 Do Not Publish 2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.
