Yudon Allen v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 4, 2025
• Docket: 10-25-00050-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-25-00050-CR

Yudon Allen, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On appeal from the 12th District Court of Madison County, Texas Senior Judge J. D. Langley, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 22-13916

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found Appellant, Yudon Allen, guilty of the felony offense of

tampering with physical evidence with intent to impair a human corpse. Allen

pled true to an enhancement paragraph, and the jury assessed his punishment

at seventy-five years confinement in a penitentiary. The trial court sentenced

Allen accordingly. This appeal ensued. We will affirm. Allen’s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief

in support of the motion asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate

record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Counsel’s brief

evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error and compliance with

the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed

the duties required of appointed counsel. See id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; High

v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also

Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman,

252 S.W.3d 403, 407–09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, “after a full examination of all

the proceedings, . . . decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders, 386

U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct.

346, 349–50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503,

509–11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is “wholly frivolous” or “without

merit” when it “lacks any basis in law or fact.” McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486

U.S. 429, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988). After a

review of the entire record in this appeal, we have determined the appeal to be

wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–28 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Allen v. State Page 2 Counsel’s motion to withdraw from representation of Allen is granted.

MATT JOHNSON Chief Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: December 4, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Affirmed Do Not Publish CRPM

Allen v. State Page 3