TDCAA    TDCAA Community  Hop To Forum Categories  Appellate    Bledsoe "Review"
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Bledsoe "Review" Login/Join 
Member
posted
The following concept taken from Bledsoe is strange to me:

"the court of appeals is not required to review the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response. The court's duty is to determine whether there are any arguable grounds"

Does Judge Meyers mean the court of appeals is not required to address the merits of the claims in its opinion? His statement becomes confusing to me because how can you determine whether a ground has arguable merit without "reviewing" the merit of the claim?

I realize the court wants to make Anders opinions as short as possible. But, would it not make more sense to say "the court of appeals need not explain why it finds the grounds raised (in either the brief filed by counsel or any pro se response) to be without merit in meeting the requirement of Rule 47.1."
 
Posts: 2385 | Registered: February 07, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
this looks similar to me to the preservation standard in Gonzales where the defendant can raise a double jeopardy claim for the first time on appeal if the record clearly reveals a double jeopardy violation. if the record reveals a violation, then the claim is preserved for review. of course, you have to consider the merits to determine if there's a violation, so the procedural default rule would seem to be meaningless.

i read this to require the court of appeals to determine if there is a claim, not whether the claim would win. sort of like a lesser-included, the court must determine if there's some argument to be made, no matter how weak or impeached it might be. kind of a low standard, I know, especially considering that the defendant's attorney has already gone through the record and (presumably) explained why several things were correct.

[This message was edited by David Newell on 11-18-05 at .]
 
Posts: 1243 | Location: houston, texas, u.s.a. | Registered: October 19, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
It is usually just as easy to review the merits of a defendant's pro se claims in an Anders brief.

John Bradley
District Attorney
Williamson County, Texas
 
Posts: 7860 | Location: Georgetown, Texas | Registered: January 25, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Well, I guess at least the court made it clear that the majority got it right in Morales, 159 S.W.3d 701. But, the way they say it is still confusing.
 
Posts: 2385 | Registered: February 07, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Fact is, some things don't make sense, they just are. In this area, the problem is that some courts of appeals have completely different practices from the others with regard to handling of Anders cases. If Bledsoe sets a rule for everyone, that is about as much as you could hope for.
 
Posts: 2137 | Location: McKinney, Texas, USA | Registered: February 15, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

TDCAA    TDCAA Community  Hop To Forum Categories  Appellate    Bledsoe "Review"

© TDCAA, 2001. All Rights Reserved.