James Andrew Shepherd v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 7, 2009
Docket03-09-00080-CR
StatusPublished

This text of James Andrew Shepherd v. State (James Andrew Shepherd 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
James Andrew Shepherd v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-09-00080-CR

James Andrew Shepherd, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 277TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 08-1193-K277, HONORABLE KEN ANDERSON, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In October 2008, appellant James Andrew Shepherd pleaded guilty to family violence

assault, second offense, and was placed on deferred adjudication supervision for four years.

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(a)(1), (b)(2) (West Supp. 2008). In January 2009, appellant

pleaded true to one of the violations alleged in the State’s motion to adjudicate. The trial court

adjudged appellant guilty and imposed a five-year prison sentence.

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 was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se

brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous

and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Pemberton and Waldrop

Affirmed

Filed: August 7, 2009

Do Not Publish

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)
Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Jackson v. State
485 S.W.2d 553 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Gainous v. State
436 S.W.2d 137 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Currie v. State
516 S.W.2d 684 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
James Andrew Shepherd v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-andrew-shepherd-v-state-texapp-2009.