Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Dustin Karl Bryant v. The State of Texas

Date: 10-13-2020

Case Number: 10-19-00421-CR

Judge: TOM GRAY

Court: TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Plaintiff's Attorney: Megan Pepper

Dustin H. Boyd

Charles Karakashian Jr.

Defendant's Attorney:



Free National Lawyer Directory



OR



Just Call 855-853-4800 for Free Help Finding a Lawyer Help You.





Description:

Gatesville, TX - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant Dustin Karl Bryant charged with Theft.







Dustin Karl Bryant was convicted of Theft of Material—

Aluminum/Bronze/Copper/Brass and sentenced to 5 1/2 years in prison. See TEX.

PENAL CODE § 31.03(e)(4)(F). We affirm the trial court's judgment.

Bryant'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 evidences a professional evaluation of

Bryant v. State Page 2

the record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We

conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See

Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also

Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d

403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all the

proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; see

Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S. Ct. 346, 102 L. Ed. 2d 300 (1988); accord Stafford v.

State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is "wholly frivolous" or

"without merit" when it "lacks any basis in law or fact." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486

U.S. 429, 439 n. 10, 108 S. Ct. 1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988). After a review of the entire

record in this appeal, we have determined the appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe

v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Outcome:
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.



Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Bryant is granted.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Dustin Karl Bryant v. The State of Texas?

The outcome was: Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment. Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Bryant is granted.

Which court heard Dustin Karl Bryant v. The State of Texas?

This case was heard in TENTH COURT OF APPEALS, TX. The presiding judge was TOM GRAY.

Who were the attorneys in Dustin Karl Bryant v. The State of Texas?

Plaintiff's attorney: Megan Pepper Dustin H. Boyd Charles Karakashian Jr.. Defendant's attorney: Free National Lawyer Directory OR Just Call 855-853-4800 for Free Help Finding a Lawyer Help You..

When was Dustin Karl Bryant v. The State of Texas decided?

This case was decided on October 13, 2020.