Saweat Jintanont v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 27, 2015
Docket05-13-01424-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Saweat Jintanont v. State (Saweat Jintanont 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
Saweat Jintanont v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Affirmed and Opinion Filed March 27, 2015

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01424-CR

SAWEAT JINTANONT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F12-45928-I

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Brown Opinion by Chief Justice Wright

Saweat Jintanont appeals his conviction, following the adjudication of his guilt, for

possession of 3,4-methylenedioxy methamphetamine in an amount less than one gram. See TEX.

HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.116(a), (b) (West 2010). The trial court assessed

punishment at six months’ confinement in a state jail facility. 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, 811–12 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). 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) (identifying duties of appellate courts and counsel in Anders cases).

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.

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 131424F.U05

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE

‐2‐

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

SAWEAT JINTANONT, Appellant Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. No. 05-13-01424-CR V. F12-45928-I). Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright], THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Brown participating.

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

Judgment entered March 27, 2015.

‐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)
Saweat Jintanont v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saweat-jintanont-v-state-texapp-2015.