Kelly, Sylvester

OPINION PRICE, J., delivered the opinion of the court in which MEYERS, WOMACK, JOHNSON, KEASLER, HERYEY and COCHRAN, JJ„ joined.

When appointed appellate counsel files a so-called Anders brief,[1] the indigent appellant has a right to review the appellate record and file a response in the court of appeals, pointing out to the appellate court any reason why he thinks there are non-frivolous issues to be raised on his behalf, notwithstanding his appointed counsel’s evaluation of the record. In this petition for discretionary review, we address the question of who should bear the ultimate responsibility for assuring that the indigent appellant is allowed access to the appellate record in order to implement this right. We hold that appointed counsel has a duty, once he has filed a motion to withdraw from representation with accompanying Anders brief, to assist the appellant in filing a motion in the court of appeals for access to the appellate record if that is indeed what the appellant wants. Once such a motion is filed, the court of appeals has the ultimate responsibility to make sure that, one way or another (we shall not dictate how), the appellant is granted access to the appellate record so that he may file his response (if, after reviewing the record, he does decide to file one) before it rules on the adequacy of the Anders brief and appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL POSTURE A jury convicted the appellant of aggravated robbery, and the trial court sentenced him to fifty years’ incarceration. Because he was indigent, the trial court appointed a lawyer to represent him on appeal. The appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal was unable to find any meritorious points of error to raise, however, and filed a motion to withdraw with an Anders brief. He wrote a letter to the appellant to inform him, inter alia, of his right to file a pro se response to the Anders brief. [*316] Trial counsel also specifically informed the appellant that he was entitled to review the appellate record in preparing that response, advising him to request the trial court to provide him with a copy of the trial record.[2] The appellant instead filed a pro se motion in the court of appeals requesting access to the appellate record.[3] When the appellant neither filed a response to the Anders brief nor sought an extension of time to do so, the Sixth Court of Appeals issued an unpublished memorandum opinion that determined the appeal to be “wholly frivolous.”[4] It therefore granted appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw from the appeal and affirmed the appellant’s conviction, making no mention of any motion for access to the appellate record.[5] The appellant apparently filed a motion for rehearing in which he once again complained that he had been deprived of access to the appellate record in order to prepare a response; the court of appeals appears to have denied this motion.[6]