Jason Ryan Jackson v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 17, 2020
Docket01-19-00657-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Jason Ryan Jackson v. State (Jason Ryan Jackson 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
Jason Ryan Jackson v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Jason Ryan Jackson v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-19-00657-CR

Trial court case number: 18-CR-0739

Trial court: 56th District Court of Galveston County

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief concluding that the above-referenced appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel has also filed a motion to withdraw. See id.; In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406–08 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Although appellant’s counsel has filed a purported Anders brief, the “Conclusion and Prayer for Relief” portion of the brief states: “Appellant respectfully asks that the judgment of the trial court be reversed and that a judgment of acquittal be entered or in the alternative that [a]ppellant’s sentence be set aside and for such other and further relief to which [a]ppellant may be justly entitled.” Such a request for relief is inconsistent with Anders procedures for frivolous appeals. See Jeffery v. State, 903 S.W.2d 776, 779–80 & n.5 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1995, no pet.) (“The usual prayer this Court sees in Anders briefs is that we reverse the trial court’s judgment and render judgment of acquittal or remand for a new trial. Such a prayer is inconsistent with appellate counsel’s brief that the appeal is frivolous.”); see also Buford v. State, No. 07-06-0160-CR, 2006 WL 3327848, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Nov. 16, 2006, order) (not designated for publication) (abating case after court notified appointed counsel that prayer for relief requesting verdict be reversed was inconsistent with counsel’s certification of no reversible error). “The correct prayer in an Anders brief is that the appellate court grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.” See Jeffery, 903 S.W.2d at 780. Accordingly, we direct appellant’s appointed counsel, Greg Russell, to file with the Clerk of this Court within 14 days of the date of this order an amended brief that includes a prayer consistent with Anders procedures. See Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408; see also Anders v. State, No. 07-11-00149-CR, 2011 WL 3568949, at *1 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Aug. 15, 2011, order) (not designated for publication) (appointed counsel filed amended Anders brief correcting prayer for relief). It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s Julie Countiss  Acting individually

Date: March 17, 2020

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)
In Re Schulman
252 S.W.3d 403 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2008)
Jeffery v. State
903 S.W.2d 776 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jason Ryan Jackson v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jason-ryan-jackson-v-state-texapp-2020.