James Otis Jones v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 8, 2018
Docket05-17-00159-CR
StatusPublished

This text of James Otis Jones v. State (James Otis Jones 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 Otis Jones v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed February 8, 2018

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-17-00159-CR

JAMES OTIS JONES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 380-81551-2015

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Myers, and Schenck Opinion by Justice Bridges James Otis Jones waived a jury and pleaded guilty to murder. During the punishment

phase, appellant pleaded not true to two enhancement paragraphs. After finding appellant guilty

and the enhancement paragraphs true, the trial court assessed punishment at life imprisonment and

a $10,000 fine. 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. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response. 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).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the

appeal is frivolous and without merit. 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Do Not Publish TEX.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 170159F.U05

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

JAMES OTIS JONES, Appellant On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas No. 05-17-00159-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. 380-81551-2015. Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Schenck participating.

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

Judgment entered February 8, 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)
James Otis Jones v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-otis-jones-v-state-texapp-2018.