Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2011

Adam Lee Gros v. State

Adam Lee Gros v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided March 24, 2011

Adam Lee Gros v. State

Opinion

02-09-397 & 398-CR


COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

 

 

                                                NOS. 02-09-00397-CR

                                                          02-09-00398-CR

 

Adam Lee Gros

 

APPELLANT

 

V.

 

The State of Texas

 

STATE

 

 

----------

 

FROM Criminal District Court No. 4 OF Tarrant COUNTY

----------

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]

----------

 

          Appellant Adam Lee Gros appeals the trial court’s judgments, which revoked his deferred adjudication community supervision in these assault-family violence cases, adjudicated him guilty, and assessed two years’ confinement each, to be served concurrently.  Gros’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion.  Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief.  386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).  We gave Gros an opportunity to file a pro se brief, and he has done so.  The State declined to file a response.

          Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.).  Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.  See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

          We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and Gros’s pro se brief.  We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgments.

 

 

PER CURIAM

 

PANEL:  MCCOY, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, J.

 

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

 

DELIVERED:  March 24, 2011



[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

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