IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-23-00425-CR SADARIUS GREER, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021-1621-C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After a jury trial, Sadarius Greer was convicted of Possession of a Controlled Substance With Intent to Deliver, To-Wit: Methamphetamine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.112. He pled “true” to one felony enhancement paragraph and the jury assessed his punishment at sixty years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 12.42(c)(1), 12.42(f). The trial court sentenced Greer accordingly, and this appeal followed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Greer’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion, asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel’s brief demonstrates a professional evaluation of the record for error and he has demonstrated compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. See id. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407-09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). By letter, we informed Greer of his right to review the appellate record and to file a pro se response. Greer did not file a pro se response.

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must conduct a full examination of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 349-50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988).

Arguments are frivolous when they “cannot conceivably persuade the court.” McCoy v. Ct. of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 436 (1988). We have reviewed the entire record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Greer is granted.

Greer v. State Page 2 STEVE SMITH Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed December 5, 2024 Do not publish [CRPM]

Greer v. State Page 3