Zacimbricc Dizhay White v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 11th District (Eastland)
• Decided: June 4, 2026
• Docket: 11-24-00215-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion filed June 4, 2026

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals __________

No. 11-24-00215-CR __________

ZACIMBRICC DIZHAY WHITE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 358th District Court Ector County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. D-23-1665-CR

MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury convicted Appellant, Zacimbricc Dizhay White, of the first-degree felony offense of possession with intent to deliver cocaine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.112(d) (West Supp. 2025). The jury assessed Appellant’s punishment at imprisonment for thirty years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this court. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that there are no 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 a copy of the clerk’s record and reporter’s record. Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to object to counsel’s motion to withdraw, to review the record and file a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief, and to 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 has not filed a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record and likewise conclude that the appeal is without merit. 1 See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 & n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The evidence presented during the guilt/innocence phase of trial established that Appellant was a drug dealer who was involved in a shooting. While Appellant was being treated for a gunshot wound by hospital personnel, a bag containing a white substance fell out of his pocket. Lab testing confirmed that the white substance was cocaine. Appellant testified that he intentionally or knowingly possessed forty- one grams of cocaine with the intent to distribute it. On this record, we agree with counsel that there are no arguable issues to present on appeal.

We note that Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of 1

Criminal Appeals pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. 2 Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

W. BRUCE WILLIAMS JUSTICE

June 4, 2026 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.