James Douglas Jones v. State ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-08-00683-CR
    James Douglas Jones, Appellant
    v.
    The State of Texas, Appellee
    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF CALDWELL COUNTY, 421ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    NO. 2003-197, HONORABLE JACK ROBISON, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    In April 2004, appellant James Douglas Jones was placed on deferred adjudication
    community supervision after he pleaded guilty to the aggravated assault of a public servant. See Tex.
    Penal Code Ann. § 22.02 (West Supp. 2009). Following a hearing on September 29, 2008, the trial
    court granted the State’s motion to adjudicate, adjudged appellant guilty, and sentenced him to
    twenty-five years in prison.
    Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a
    brief concluding 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); High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State,
    
    516 S.W.2d 684
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 
    485 S.W.2d 553
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1972);
    Gainous v. State, 
    436 S.W.2d 137
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s
    brief and has filed a pro se brief in response.
    We have reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the pro se brief. We agree with
    counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might
    arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
    (holding that it is constitutional error for appellate court to address nonmeritorious arguments raised
    in pro se response to Anders brief). Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
    The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
    __________________________________________
    Jan P. Patterson, Justice
    Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Pemberton
    Affirmed
    Filed: November 20, 2009
    Do Not Publish
    2