In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-26-00180-CR
DONNELL E. ENGLISH, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court 2
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1905134, Honorable William A. Knight, Presiding1
July 22, 2026
ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND
Before PARKER, C.J., and YARBROUGH and PRATT, JJ.
Pending before this Court is a motion to withdraw supported by a brief filed
pursuant to Anders v. California.2 By the brief, counsel raises one potentially arguable
issue. Agreeing the issue is arguable, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and remand
the case to the trial court for appointment of new counsel.
1 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals, this case was transferred to this Court by the
Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 73.001. We apply the Second Court’s precedent to the extent it conflicts with our own. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.
2 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).
BACKGROUND
Appellant was charged by amended indictment in early 2026 with various sexual
offenses against a child. The matter was tried to a jury, and it found Appellant guilty of
Count I, Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child.3 The jury acquitted Appellant of the
remaining charges.
After punishment evidence was presented, the jury assessed punishment against
Appellant at 55 years of imprisonment.
ANALYSIS
Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief
pursuant to Anders. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744–45. After an appellant’s courtappointed attorney files a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief, we must independently
examine the record for any arguable ground that may be raised on the appellant’s behalf.
See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). After doing so, we
have two choices. One, we may determine that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue
an opinion explaining that we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (citing Anders, 386
U.S. at 744). Or, two, we may determine that arguable grounds for an appeal exist and
remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief issues.
See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826–27 (citing Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 510).
3 TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.021(a)(2)(B).
2
Here, after our own independent review, we have found at least one arguably
meritorious issue on which to base an appeal. Counsel noted that case law suggests a
non-victim witness should not be asked for his or her recommendation of a particular
punishment. See, e.g., Hughes v. State, 787 S.W.2d 193, 196 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi
1990, pet. ref’d) (“[t]he argument that a witness may recommend a particular punishment
to the trier of fact has been soundly rejected”).
The witness who testified in the underlying case was a non-victim witness who did
not ultimately provide a recommendation as to punishment. Nevertheless, we cannot
conclude, given the nature of the exchange that occurred during the punishment phase
of trial and the punishment assessed against Appellant, that the appeal before us is wholly
frivolous. This is so irrespective of whether it ultimately prevails. Id. See Davis v. State,
683 S.W.3d 828, 830 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2023, no pet.) (“[w]hen at least one issue is
arguable, Anders is not the proper mode of continuation”) (citing Limauro v. State, 675
S.W.3d 368 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2023, no pet.) (thoroughly explaining Anders procedure
and how it is to be properly utilized by appellate counsel). See also Gonzalez v. State,
No. 07-26-00010-CR, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 5338, at *2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo June 9,
2026, order) (citing Poteet v. State, No. 07-24-00186-CR, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 8745,
*2 n.2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 17. 2024, order) (“We make no comment upon the
ultimate viability of the issues mentioned but only conclude they necessitate
development.”)). Consequently, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, abate the
proceeding, and remand the matter to the trial court.
3
CONCLUSION
Upon remand, the trial court shall, by written order, appoint new counsel to
represent Appellant on appeal. The name, address, email address, telephone number,
and State Bar number of newly appointed counsel must be specified in the order. The
trial court will then cause its order to be filed in a supplemental clerk’s record with the
Clerk of this Court no later than Tuesday, September 1, 2026.
Newly appointed counsel may request supplementation of the appellate record as
needed. Such supplementation, if any, must be requested by written motion filed with the
Clerk of this Court before Tuesday, September 8, 2026. The deadline by which newly
appointed counsel must file an appellant’s brief or other brief addressing the
aforementioned issue and any other arguable issues he or she encounters is Tuesday,
September 22, 2026, unless otherwise extended.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
4