Jennifer Garza v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Opinion filed August 20, 2026

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11-25-00258-CR

__________

JENNIFER GARZA, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from 118th District Court Howard County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 17106

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jennifer Garza, was indicted for the offense of possession of a controlled substance, namely methamphetamine, in an amount of 200 grams or more but less than 400 grams, a first-degree felony. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(e) (West Supp. 2025). A jury convicted Appellant of this offense and assessed her punishment at six years’ imprisonment in the Institutional Division

2

of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The trial court sentenced Appellant accordingly. We affirm.

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this court, supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are no meritorious or arguable issues to present on appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and copies of the clerk’s and reporter’s records. Counsel also advised Appellant of her right to (1) object to counsel’s motion, (2) review the record, (3) file a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief, and (4) file a petition for discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5, 68. As such, court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders, 386 U.S. at 742–44; Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409–12; and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

Appellant did not file a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the brief and the record, and we likewise conclude that this appeal is without merit. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Therefore, we agree with counsel that no meritorious or arguable grounds for appeal exist. 1 See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826– 0F

27.

1 We note that Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review in the Court of Criminal Appeals pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.

3

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

W. STACY TROTTER JUSTICE

August 20, 2026 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.