Jacquelyn Mary Henderson v. State ( 1996 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-95-00516-CR

Jacquelyn Mary Henderson, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 277TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 94-044-K277, HONORABLE WILLIAM S. LOTT, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

Appellant pleaded guilty before a jury to possessing more than five pounds of
marihuana. The jury assessed punishment at imprisonment for six years.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the
appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why
there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988);
Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553
(Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to
appellant, and appellant was advised of her right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro
se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support
the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Aboussie and Kidd

Affirmed

Filed: March 13, 1996

Do Not Publish