TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00735-CR

Joseph Glen Haren, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 433RD DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. CR2023-477D, THE HONORABLE GLENN H. DEVLIN, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In front of a jury, Joseph Glen Haren pleaded (1) guilty to driving while intoxicated—with two or more previous convictions for the same type of offense; (2) true to the three felony enhancement paragraphs allegations; and (3) not true to the deadly weapon allegation in the indictment. Tex. Penal Code §§ 12.42(d), 49.04(b), 49.09. After hearing evidence, the jury, as instructed, found Haren guilty as charged in the indictment and found the allegations in the enhancement paragraphs true.

It also found that Haren had used a deadly weapon during the commission of the felony offense and assessed punishment at imprisonment for life.

Haren’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief contending that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Haren’s court-appointed attorney’s brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id.; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of “assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous”). Haren’s counsel has represented to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Haren; advised Haren of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court. He also provided to Haren a Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record lacking only Haren’s signature and the date and provided the mailing address for this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Haren has not filed a pro se brief nor a motion for extension of time to file a brief.

We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s order.

__________________________________________ Chari L. Kelly, Justice Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Ellis Affirmed Filed: August 29, 2025 Do Not Publish