Michael Jones v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )


Menu:
  •                                   IN THE
    TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
    No. 10-23-00217-CR
    MICHAEL JONES,
    Appellant
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,
    Appellee
    From the 87th District Court
    Freestone County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 20-174CR
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Michael Jones pled guilty of the first-degree felony offense of manufacture or
    delivery of a controlled substance. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.112. The
    trial court assessed Jones’s punishment at twenty years confinement in the Texas
    Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division. Id. This appeal ensued. We
    affirm the trial court’s judgment.
    Jones’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in
    support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and
    that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 
    87 S.Ct. 1396
    , 
    18 L.Ed.2d 493
     (1967). Counsel’s brief evidences a professional evaluation of the
    record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel.                We
    conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See 
    id. at 744
    , 
    87 S.Ct. at 1400
    ; High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    , 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.]
    1978); see also Kelly v. State, 
    436 S.W.3d 313
    , 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re
    Schulman, 
    252 S.W.3d 403
    , 407–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
    In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, “after a full examination of all the
    proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders, 
    386 U.S. at 744
    ,
    
    87 S.Ct. at 1400
    ; see Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    , 80, 
    109 S.Ct. 346
    , 349–50, 
    102 L.Ed.2d 300
    (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 509–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal
    is “wholly frivolous” or “without merit” when it “lacks any basis in law or fact.”
    McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 
    486 U.S. 429
    , 438 n.10, 
    108 S.Ct. 1895
    , 1902 n.10, 
    100 L.Ed.2d 440
     (1988). After a review of the entire record in this appeal, we have determined the
    appeal to be wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826–28 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
    Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Jones is granted.
    MATT JOHNSON
    Justice
    Michael Jones v. The State of Texas                                                      Page 2
    Before Chief Justice Gray,
    Justice Johnson, and
    Justice Smith
    Affirmed
    Opinion delivered and filed May 23, 2024
    Do not publish
    [CR25]
    Michael Jones v. The State of Texas        Page 3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-23-00217-CR

Filed Date: 5/23/2024

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/24/2024