Affirmed and Opinion Filed June 13, 2023

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-00778-CR ANTONIO ANTHONY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F21-60313 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Nowell, Goldstein, and Breedlove Opinion by Justice Nowell A jury convicted Antonio Anthony of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Appellant’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief in which he concluded the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit as well as a motion to withdraw as appointed counsel.

When an appellate court receives an Anders brief asserting no arguable grounds for appeal exist, we must determine that issue independently by conducting our own review of the record. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967) (emphasizing court, and not appointed counsel, determines whether case is “frivolous” after full examination of proceedings); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (quoting Anders). If we conclude, after conducting an independent review, that “appellate counsel has exercised professional diligence in assaying the record for error” and agree the appeal is frivolous, we should grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. Crowe v. State, 595 S.W.3d 317, 319 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2020, no pet.) (quoting Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 689 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)).

The brief before us meets the requirements of Anders. It presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there were no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Appellant was provided a complete record and advised of his rights to file a pro se response; he did not file a response. We also have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit, and we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

/Erin A. Nowell// ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE 220778f.u05 Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

–2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT ANTONIO ANTHONY, Appellant On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-22-00778-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F21-60313.

Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Breedlove participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 13th day of June, 2023.

–3–