Percy King v. State

Affirmed; Opinion Filed June 28, 2016.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-15-01365-CR PERCY KING, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14-00185-W

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Evans, and Brown Opinion by Justice Evans

A jury convicted Percy King of continuous violence against the family. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 25.11(a) (West 2011). After finding two enhancement paragraphs true, the jury assessed punishment at forty years’ imprisonment. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 151365F.U05

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

PERCY KING, Appellant On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District

Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-15-01365-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F14-00185-W.

Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. Justices THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Lang-Miers and Brown participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered this 28th day of June, 2016.