Billy Ray Byers v. The State of TexasAppeal from 427th District Court of Travis County (memorandum opinion by chief justice jones)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-13-00543-CR Billy Ray Byers, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 427TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1-DC-11-302268, THE HONORABLE BOB PERKINS, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted appellant Billy Ray Byers of murder, see Tex. Penal Code § 19.02(b)(1), and assessed his punishment at confinement for life in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, see id. § 12.32. 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 (1988). Appellant s counsel sent appellant a copy of the brief along with a letter advising appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. No pro se brief or other written response has been filed. We have conducted an independent review of the record 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 trial court s judgment of conviction is affirmed. __________________________________________ J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose Affirmed Filed: July 23, 2014 Do Not Publish 2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.
