Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

appealgood faithappellant
appealappellant

Related Cases

Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893
View Case »
St. George v. State, 237 S.W.3d 720
View Case »
U.S. v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 42 S.Ct. 301, 66 L.Ed. 604
View Case »
Cicoria v. State, 332 Md. 21, 629 A.2d 742
View Case »
People v. Babcock, 469 Mich. 247, 666 N.W.2d 231
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684

Facts

On May 24, 1973, Tommy Sanders, Jr., a Dallas cab driver, was robbed by the appellant and his companion. During the robbery, the appellant shot Sanders in the back of the head, leaving him for dead; however, Sanders survived and identified the appellant as his assailant. The appellant's extrajudicial confession was introduced into evidence, and he did not present any evidence in his defense.

The record reflects that Tommy Sanders, Jr., a Dallas cab driver, was robbed by appellant and his companion on May 24, 1973, during the course of which robbery appellant shot Sanders in the back of the head and left him for dead. Sanders lived and made an eyewitness identification of the appellant as his assailant. Appellant's extrajudicial confession, shown to have been properly taken, was introduced into evidence. The appellant offered no evidence.

Issue

Whether the appeal from the conviction for robbery by assault with a firearm has any merit.

Whether the appeal from the conviction for robbery by assault with a firearm has any merit.

Rule

Court-appointed counsel must advance arguable grounds of error for an indigent appellant as required by Anders v. California, but they are not required to make arguments they do not consider worthy of inclusion.

While arguable grounds of error should be advanced by counsel for an indigent appellant as required by Anders, if there are any, Anders should not be interpreted as requiring appointed counsel to make arguments he would not consider worthy of inclusion in a brief for a paying client or to urge reversal if in fact he can find no merit in the appeal.

Analysis

The court examined the record and found that the appeal was without merit and wholly frivolous. The court noted that the counsel's brief did not present any arguable grounds of error and demonstrated that there were no grounds that could be advanced in good faith.

We have carefully examined the entire record and find the appeal to be without merit and wholly frivolous. We are at a loss to know what possible arguable grounds of error appellant's counsel could have in all honesty advanced.

Conclusion

The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the judgment of the lower court, concluding that the appeal was without merit.

The judgment is affirmed.

Who won?

The State prevailed in the case because the court found the appeal to be without merit and frivolous.

The court found the appeal to be without merit and wholly frivolous.

You must be