Tikie Jones v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 21, 2024
• Docket: 01-22-00586-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued May 21, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-22-00585-CR NO. 01-22-00586-CR ——————————— TIKIE JONES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 184th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case Nos. 1682295 and 1682296

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After a jury trial, appellant Tikie Jones was convicted in trial court cause

number 1682295 of the second-degree offense of aggravated assault of a family

member (dating relationship) and in trial court cause number 1682296 of the first-

degree offense of serious bodily injury of a child under 15 years of age . See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.02(a),(b), 22.04(a); TEX. FAM. CODE § 71.0021(a). Jones was

sentenced to four years’ confinement in the Institutions Division of the Texas

Department of Criminal Justice for the aggravated assault offense and nine years’

confinement in the Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice

for the injury to a child offense, with the sentences to run concurrently.

On appeal, Jones’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, along with

a brief, stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is without

merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional

evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal

authority. 386 U.S. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and is

unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S.

at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.]

2006, no pet.).

Counsel advised Jones of her right to access the record and provided her with

a form motion for access to the record. Counsel further advised Jones of her right

to file a pro se response to the Anders brief. Jones requested access to the record

and filed a pro se response to counsel’s briefs in each cause.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds 2 for review, and the appeals are frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing

that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of

proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763,

767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable

grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines

whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that an

appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by

filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See

Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.1 Attorney Allen C. Isbell must immediately send Jones the required notice

and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c).

We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Landau, and Hightower.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that she may, on her own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 3