Full Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-25-00071-CR Reginald Sanders, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. 22DCR86496, THE HONORABLE STEVEN J. DUSKIE, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted Appellant Reginald Sanders of the third-degree felony offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. See Tex. Penal Code § 46.04(a)(1), (e). The State alleged that he had committed three prior felony convictions for enhancement of punishment. The trial court sentenced him to thirty years in prison pursuant to a sentencing agreement. See id. § 12.42(d). Sanders’s court-appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id. at 744-45; see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81–82 (1988); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009). Counsel has certified to this Court that he has provided Sanders with a copy of the motion and brief, advised him of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response, and supplied him with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). No pro se brief has been filed. Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of the record to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Penson, 488 U.S. at 80; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The record reflects that the State charged Sanders with intentionally and knowingly possessing a firearm on or about August 5, 2022, before the fifth anniversary of his release from confinement following his December 14, 2021 conviction for the felony offense of possession of a controlled substance. Officer Angel Montes Vega testified that on August 5, 2022, he responded to a criminal trespass call at an apartment complex. He spoke with the property manager, Hubert Marion, who told him that there was someone inside an apartment that should have been empty. Officer Montes entered the apartment and found Sanders laying down inside. He testified that Sanders attempted to grab a backpack that was sitting next to his feet. Officer Montes detained Sanders. Officer Montes searched the backpack and found a firearm, a loaded magazine, and a green camouflage glove. A video recording from Officer Montes’s body camera was admitted. Marion testified that he had changed the locks on the apartment the evening prior to the trespassing incident and that he did not see the backpack in the apartment. He testified that he called the police the next morning because a neighbor informed him that someone had climbed through a window into that apartment. Officer Devonte Johnson testified about an interaction he had with Sanders the day before the trespassing incident. A video clip and photos of screenshots from his body camera video were admitted. He testified that in the video and the screenshots, Sanders was 2 wearing a backpack and holding a camouflage glove. He testified that he did not search the backpack. Detective Ricardo Martinez testified that he interviewed Sanders after he had been arrested for the trespassing incident. Detective Martinez collected a DNA sample from Sanders. He also swabbed the firearm found in the backpack. He also test fired the gun and testified that it was in working order. He testified that he had watched both officer’s body camera videos and testified that Sanders was wearing the same backpack and holding the same glove when talking to Officer Johnson that were found in the apartment by Officer Montes. Charity Hubbard testified that she analyzed the DNA samples in this case. There was a match between Sanders’s DNA sample and the sample taken from the trigger of the firearm. A stipulation regarding Sanders’s prior felony conviction for possession of a controlled substance was admitted. It reads, “It’s been stipulated that the defendant and his attorney stipulate that the defendant was finally convicted of the offense of possession of a controlled substance less than one gram on the 14th day of December A.D. 2021, in cause number 83663 in the 426th Judicial District Court of Bell County, Texas.” A copy of the judgment of conviction for that prior felony was admitted. It reflects that Sanders was convicted of possession of a controlled substance on December 14, 2021—almost eight months before the offense date in this case. See Tapps v. State, 257 S.W.3d 438, 445 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008), aff’d, 294 S.W.3d 175 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (explaining that minimum length of prohibited possession is five years from date of conviction, and thus, “[t]he date of release from confinement is not necessary when the alleged possession occurs within five years of the date of conviction because the period of prohibition extends for this duration in any event”). 3 At the conclusion of trial, the trial court charged the jury on the law related to the offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. The court’s charge tracked the allegations in the indictment. After hearing all the evidence, the jury found Sanders guilty of the third-degree felony offense of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. The State and Sanders entered into an agreement in which he pleaded true to the enhancement paragraphs, and the State recommended a thirty-year sentence. After admonishing Sanders of his rights, the trial court accepted his plea of true to the enhancement paragraphs and sentenced him to thirty years in prison. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 46.04(e), 12.42(d). We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of conviction. __________________________________________ Gisela D. Triana, Justice Before Justices Triana, Theofanis, and Crump Affirmed Filed: October 20, 2026 Do Not Publish 4