Denise Annette Dixon v. the State of Texas
This text of Denise Annette Dixon v. the State of Texas (Denise Annette Dixon v. the State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-21-00048-CR
DENISE ANNETTE DIXON, Appellant v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the 52nd District Court Coryell County, Texas Trial Court No. 19-25693
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Denise Anette Dixon entered an open plea of guilty to the offense of possession of
a controlled substance. The trial court convicted Dixon of the offense and assessed
punishment at eighteen months confinement in a state jail facility. We affirm.
Dixon’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 (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 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744; High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313,
319-320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (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 v. California, 386
U.S. at 744; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (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, 439 n. 10
(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, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Dixon is granted.
STEVE SMITH Justice
Dixon v. State Page 2 Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Affirmed; motion granted Opinion delivered and filed November 3, 2021 Do not publish [CR25]
Dixon v. State Page 3
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Denise Annette Dixon v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/denise-annette-dixon-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.