Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Ryan Delgado v. the State of Texas
Citation: Not availableDocket: 02-19-00294-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; December 1, 2021; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Ryan Delgado was found guilty of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and sentenced to 19 years of confinement. His appellate counsel filed a notice of appeal and a motion for new trial, raising several issues, including claims that the verdict was against the law and facts, insufficient evidence supported the verdict, and the jury improperly received additional evidence during deliberations. The trial court did not rule on the motion for new trial, which was overruled by operation of law after seventy-five days due to this lack of a ruling. Delgado's appellate counsel subsequently filed a motion to withdraw, asserting there were no arguable grounds for relief, in accordance with Anders v. California. Counsel provided Delgado with the necessary documentation and informed him of his rights to respond and pursue discretionary review. Delgado submitted a pro se brief raising various issues, while the State concurred with counsel's assessment of the appeal as frivolous. The reviewing court conducted an independent evaluation of the record, discovering a potentially arguable issue regarding the trial court's admission of extraneous-offense evidence related to two uncharged robberies presented during the trial. This evidence was emphasized by the State, constituting a significant portion of the trial. Delgado's trial attorney objected to this evidence, but the court allowed it, deeming it relevant to understanding the charged robbery. Notably, the Anders brief did not address this extraneous-offense evidence or its relevance to the jury's understanding of the case. The role in an Anders appeal is limited to identifying whether there are arguable grounds for an appeal. It is clarified that the extraneous-offense issue is not the sole potential issue for appeal, nor has its merit been determined. The court does not adjudicate the merits of any arguable issues at this stage. If arguable grounds are found, the appellant is entitled to new counsel to address these merits. Consequently, the appellate counsel's brief is struck, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is abated to allow the trial court to appoint new appellate counsel. This new counsel is tasked with reviewing the record and filing a new brief within specified timelines. A supplemental clerk's record documenting this new appointment must be submitted within 30 days, after which the appeal will automatically be reinstated. The appellant's new brief is due 30 days later, followed by any response from the State. The order will be transmitted to relevant parties, including the appellant and trial court officials.