James Jassie Gardner v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 21, 2025
• Docket: 10-24-00359-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-24-00359-CR

James Jassie Gardner, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On appeal from the 52nd District Court of Coryell County, Texas Judge Trent D. Farrell, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 22-27419

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court found James Jassie Gardner violated four terms and

conditions of his community supervision on the felony offense of assault

family violence by impeding breath or circulation. See TEX. PENAL CODE

ANN. § 22.01. As a result, the trial court revoked his community supervision

and assessed his punishment at ten years’ confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division. See TEX. PENAL CODE

ANN. § 12.34. This appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Gardner’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

James Jassie Gardner v. The State of Texas Page 2 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 Gardner is

granted.

MATT JOHNSON Chief Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: August 21, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirm; Motion granted Do Not Publish CR25

James Jassie Gardner v. The State of Texas Page 3