Camaron Dishawn Harris v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 29, 2018
Docket05-16-01504-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Camaron Dishawn Harris v. State (Camaron Dishawn Harris v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Camaron Dishawn Harris v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed June 29, 2018

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-01504-CR

CAMARON DISHAWN HARRIS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-81483-2014

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Brown, and Boatright Opinion by Justice Bridges Camaron Dishawn Harris waived a jury trial and pleaded guilty to burglary of a habitation.

After finding appellant guilty, the trial court assessed punishment at eleven years’ imprisonment.

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, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel

Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets requirements of Anders). Counsel delivered a copy

of the brief to appellant. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)

(noting appellant has right to file pro se response to Anders brief filed by counsel). 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.

/David L. Bridges/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 161540F.U05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

CAMARON DISHAWN HARRIS, On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Appellant Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-81483-2014. No. 05-16-01504-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. Justices Brown and Boatright participating. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered June 29, 2018.

–3–

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Bledsoe v. State
178 S.W.3d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Kelly, Sylvester
436 S.W.3d 313 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Camaron Dishawn Harris v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/camaron-dishawn-harris-v-state-texapp-2018.