Christopher Garner, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals held that a court of appeals does not act inconsistently with Bledsoe when, having concluded that an Anders appeal presents no issues of arguable merit, it explains in its opinion why each raised point lacks merit. Detailed analysis of the points does not inherently imply arguable merit and did not violate the appellant's constitutional rights under Anders, Bledsoe, or due process, because the analysis here was neither complex nor based on unsettled precedent. The judgment of the court of appeals affirming the aggravated robbery conviction was affirmed. The opinion was unanimous, and no separate writings were filed.