Opinion filed November 15, 2018




                                     In The


        Eleventh Court of Appeals
                                  __________

                 Nos. 11-18-00047-CR & 11-18-00048-CR
                               __________

                   ROBERT DEMISON, III, Appellant
                                        V.
                    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


                     On Appeal from the 91st District Court
                            Eastland County, Texas
                     Trial Court Cause Nos. 23622 & 23623


                     MEMORANDUM OPINION
      A jury previously convicted Appellant, Robert Demison, III, of the offenses
of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and assault against a public servant. We
affirmed those convictions in a prior opinion but remanded the causes for a new
punishment hearing. See Demison v. State, Nos. 11-15-00126-CR, 11-15-00127-
CR, 2017 WL 3573254, at *9 (Tex. App.—Eastland Aug. 17, 2017, no pet.) (mem.
op., not designated for publication).   On remand, a jury assessed Appellant’s
punishment at confinement for sixty-five years and twenty years, respectively, and
also assessed a fine of $5,000 in each cause. The current appeals stem from the
punishment hearing conducted on remand. We affirm.
        Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed in this court a motion to
withdraw as counsel in both appeals. The motion is supported by a brief in which
counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the records and applicable law
and concludes that there are no meritorious issues to present on appeal and that the
appeals are frivolous. Counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy
of the motion to withdraw, and a copy of the clerk’s records and the reporter’s record.
Counsel advised Appellant of his right to review the record in each cause and file a
response to counsel’s brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to file a
petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals seeking review by that court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4, 68. Court-appointed
counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252
S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1991).
        Appellant has not filed a response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following the
procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the
record, and we agree that the appeals are frivolous.1




        1
         We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R.
APP. P. 68.

                                                    2
        The motion to withdraw is granted in each cause, and the judgments of the
trial court are affirmed.


                                                                   PER CURIAM


November 15, 2018
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Willson, J.,
Wright, S.C.J.,2 and Judge Satterwhite.3

Bailey, C.J., and Willson, J., not participating.




        2
          Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland,
sitting by assignment.
        3
            Rodney W. Satterwhite, 441st District Court, Midland, sitting by assignment.

                                                      3
