Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 1999

Kenneth Wayne Biggins v. State

Kenneth Wayne Biggins v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided March 10, 1999

Kenneth Wayne Biggins v. State

Opinion

98302CR.Biggins-KennethWayne.wrv.cb.wpd






IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS


No. 10-98-302-CR


     KENNETH WAYNE BIGGINS,

                                                                              Appellant

     v.


     THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                              Appellee


From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court # 23460CR

                                                                                                                

O P I N I O N

                                                                                                                      

      Kenneth Wayne Biggins was charged with three counts of aggravated robbery. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 29.02, 29.03 (Vernon 1994). The jury found Biggins guilty on all three counts and assessed punishment at life imprisonment.

      Counsel has filed an Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); Wilson v. State, 955 S.W.2d 693 (Tex. App.—Waco 1997, order) (discussing procedures for Anders appeal, revisiting Johnson v. State, 885 S.W.2d 641, 646 (Tex. App.—Waco 1994, pet. ref’d)). Counsel states that he has diligently reviewed the record and is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible error. We have independently reviewed the record, and we are satisfied that counsel has thoroughly searched the record for any arguable appellate claim. McCoy v. Court of Appeals of Wisconsin Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 442, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1904, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988). We have determined that counsel correctly concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Id.

      Counsel advised Biggins that he has the right to review the record and to file a pro se response on his own behalf. Biggins has filed a response in which he complains of ineffective assistance of counsel. On the record before us, we do not find this to be a viable claim. Nevertheless, we do not preclude the possibility of a habeas corpus proceeding, where the record can be developed on any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel he might assert.

      Because we have no viable points of error to consider, the judgment is affirmed. We simultaneously grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Id.



 

BILL VANCE

                                                                                           Justice


Before Chief Justice Davis,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Gray

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed March 10, 1999

Do not publish

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.