Sheyenne Nicole Liles v. State ( 2015 )

Affirmed and Opinion Filed November 25, 2015
In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-01386-CR
SHEYENNE NICOLE LILES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F13-71006-Q
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Schenck
Opinion by Justice Bridges
A jury convicted Sheyenne Nicole Liles of compelling prostitution of a child younger
than eighteen years of age and assessed punishment at eighteen years’ imprisonment. See TEX.
PENAL CODE ANN. § 43.05(a)(2) (West Supp. 2015). On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief
in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the
requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional
evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See
High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a
copy of the brief to appellant. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App.
2014) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).
Appellant filed a pro se response raising several issues After reviewing counsel’s brief,
appellant’s pro se response, and the record, we agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit.
See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate
court’s duty in Anders cases). We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the
appeal.
We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Do Not Publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47
141386F.U05
/David L. Bridges/
DAVID L. BRIDGES
JUSTICE
‐2‐
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
SHEYENNE NICOLE LILES, Appellant Appeal from the 204th Judicial District
Court of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No.
No. 05-14-01386-CR V. F13-71006-Q).
Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges,
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Lang-Miers and Schenck
participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Judgment entered November 25, 2015.
‐3‐