Brandy Carnell Vaillant v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided September 20, 2019·No. 03-18-00734-CR·Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00734-CR

Brandy Carnell Vaillant, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY NO. CR2017-773, THE HONORABLE DON R. BURGESS, JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER FOR CLERK TO PROVIDE A P P E L L A T E R E C O R D TO A P P E L L A N T

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw supported by

a brief concluding that the instant appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel has certified to the Court that he provided copies

of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate

record and file a pro se response, and supplied appellant with a form motion for pro se access to

the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).

Appellant has timely filed the motion requesting access to the appellate record with this Court.

Appellant’s pro se motion is granted. We hereby direct the clerk of the trial

court to provide a copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to provide written verification to this Court of the date and manner in which the appellate record was

provided, on or before September 30, 2019. See id. at 321.

It is ordered on September 20, 2019.

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly

Do Not Publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Brandy Carnell Vaillant v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Brandy Carnell Vaillant v. State (Brandy Carnell Vaillant v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Kelly, Sylvester
436 S.W.3d 313 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2014)