Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas

Court of Appeals of Texas

Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas

DecidedOctober 8, 2009

Docket11-09-00197-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas (Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas) 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

Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion filed October 8, 2009

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________

No. 11-09-00197-CR __________

STEPHANIE LAVON WORD A/K/A STEPHANIE PAYNE, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 104th District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 16863B

MEMORANDUM OPINION The jury convicted Stephanie Lavon Work a/k/a Stephanie Payne of the offense of theft. The trial court assessed her punishment at confinement for twenty-three months in a state jail facility. We dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of her right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005, no pet.). Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX . R. APP . P. 66. Black v. State, 217 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2007, no pet.). The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

October 8, 2009 Do not publish. See TEX . R. APP . P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Strange, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion filed October 8, 2009

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________

No. 11-09-00197-CR __________

STEPHANIE LAVON WORD A/K/A STEPHANIE PAYNE, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 104th District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 16863B

MEMORANDUM OPINION The jury convicted Stephanie Lavon Work a/k/a Stephanie Payne of the offense of theft. The trial court assessed her punishment at confinement for twenty-three months in a state jail facility. We dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of her right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); and Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005, no pet.). Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises appellant that she may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX . R. APP . P. 66. Black v. State, 217 S.W.3d 687 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2007, no pet.). The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

October 8, 2009 Do not publish. See TEX . R. APP . P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Strange, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Stephanie Lavon Word A/K/A Stephanie Payne v. State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephanie-lavon-word-aka-stephanie-payne-v-state-o-texapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack