Curlie Lee Garner v. the State of Texas
CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)
Date FiledJuly 16, 2026
Docket10-25-00230-CR
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Court of Appeals
Tenth Appellate District of Texas
10-25-00230-CR
Curlie Lee Garner,
Appellant
v.
The State of Texas,
Appellee
On appeal from the
19th District Court of McLennan County, Texas
Judge E. Alan Bennett, presiding
Trial Court Cause No. 2024-2221-C1
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Following a jury trial, Curlie Lee Garner was found guilty of the offense
of failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements. See TEX.
PENAL CODE ANN. § 62.102. The trial court found the enhancement paragraph
true, assessed his punishment at ten years’ confinement and sentenced him
accordingly. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.33 and 12.42. This appeal
ensued. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Garner’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 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 id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; 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).
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, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346,
349–50, 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, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 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, 826–28 (Tex. Crim. App.
2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Curlie Lee Garner v. The State of Texas Page 2
Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Garner is granted.
MATT JOHNSON
Chief Justice
OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: July 16, 2026
Before Chief Justice Johnson,
Justice Smith, and
Justice Harris
Affirmed
Motion granted
Do Not Publish
CR25
Curlie Lee Garner v. The State of Texas Page 3