Justin Wayne Herring v. the State of Texas

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________

No. 02-25-00040-CR
___________________________

JUSTIN WAYNE HERRING, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the 355th District Court
Hood County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR16414

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Wallach and Walker, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Justin Wayne Herring was indicted on two counts of aggravated

assault with a deadly weapon.1 See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 22.01(a)(1), 22.02(a)(2).

He pleaded not guilty, and a jury trial was held. After hearing all the evidence, the jury

convicted Herring of both counts. Following the trial’s sentencing phase, the jury

assessed Herring’s punishment at twenty-five years’ incarceration on each count, and

the trial court sentenced him accordingly.2 Herring filed a motion for new trial, which

was denied after a hearing. Herring timely appealed.

After determining that Herring’s appeal was frivolous, Herring’s court-

appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and, in support of

that motion, a brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396,

1400 (1967). Counsel’s motion and brief meet the requirements of Anders by

presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no

arguable grounds for relief. See id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400. Additionally, in

compliance with Kelly v. State, counsel provided Herring with copies of the brief and

1
Herring was also indicted on one count of intoxication assault with a vehicle
causing serious bodily injury. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.07(a)(1). But the State
elected not to pursue this count at trial, and the trial court ultimately dismissed it at
the State’s request.
2
The State filed a notice of intent to enhance Herring’s punishment based on a
prior felony conviction. Because Herring pleaded “true” to the enhancement
allegation, the punishment range for each of his aggravated-assault-with-a-deadly-
weapon offenses was elevated to that of a first-degree felony. See id. §§ 12.42(b),
22.02(b).

2
the motion to withdraw; he informed Herring of his right to file a pro se response, to

review the record, and to seek discretionary review pro se should this court affirm his

convictions; and he sent Herring paper copies of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s

record. See 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). This court gave Herring the

opportunity to file a pro se response to the Anders brief, but he did not do so. The

State did not file a brief.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and have determined

that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record

that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28

(Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2006). We therefore grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial

court’s judgments.

/s/ Brian Walker

Brian Walker
Justice

Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: August 28, 2025

3