Case Number: 10-17-00389-CR

Judge: TOM GRAY

Court: TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Plaintiff's Attorney: Kathryn J. Gilliam

Defendant's Attorney: Stan Schwieger

Description: Mystee Lynn Jackson pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance,
methamphetamine, under one gram. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115(b)
(West 2017). An adjudication of guilt was deferred and Jackson was placed on
community supervision for three years. Pursuant to a motion to proceed with
adjudication, Jackson’s community supervision was revoked and Jackson was
adjudicated guilty. She was sentenced to 16 months in State Jail.
Jackson’s appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in
Jackson v. State Page 2

support of the motion to withdraw, asserting that the appeal presents no issues of
arguable merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).
Counsel advised Jackson that counsel had filed the motion and brief pursuant to Anders
and provided Jackson a copy of the record, advised Jackson of her right to review the
record, and advised Jackson of her right to submit a response on her own behalf. Jackson
did not submit a response.
Counsel asserts in the Anders brief that counsel has made a thorough review of the
entire reporter’s record and clerk’s record for non-frivolous issues, including a review of
the proof and elements necessary to revoke deferred adjudication community
supervision, the procedure used by the trial court, and the sentence imposed. After the
review, counsel has concluded there is no non-frivolous issue to raise in this appeal.
Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the record for error, and we
conclude that counsel performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See Anders,
386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also In re
Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
Upon the filing of an Anders brief, as the reviewing appellate court, it is our duty
to independently examine the record to decide whether counsel is correct in determining
that an appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503,
511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Arguments are frivolous when they "cannot conceivably
persuade the court." McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 436, 108 S. Ct. 1895, 100 L.
Jackson v. State Page 3

Ed. 2d 440 (1988).
Having carefully reviewed the entire record and the Anders brief, we have
determined that the appeal is frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's Judgment Adjudicating Guilt
signed on November 30, 2017.
Should Jackson wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals, she must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary
review or must file a pro se petition for discretionary review. No substitute counsel will
be appointed. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from
the date of this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing or timely motion for en
banc reconsideration has been overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any
petition and all copies of the petition for discretionary review must be filed with the Clerk
of the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. (Tex. Crim. App. 1997, amended
eff. Sept. 1, 2011). Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the
requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P.
68.4. See also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409 n.22.

Outcome: Counsel's motion to withdraw from representation of Jackson is granted, and
counsel is discharged from representing Jackson in this appeal.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: