Jason Ryan Jackson v. State ( 2020 )

Opinion issued April 9, 2020
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-19-00657-CR
———————————
JASON RYAN JACKSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 56th District Court
Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 18-CR-0739
MEMORANDUM OPINION
After appellant, Jason Ryan Jackson, with an agreed punishment
recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the felony offense of possession
of a controlled substance: namely, methamphetamine, weighing less than one
gram,1 the trial court deferred adjudication of his guilt, placed him on community
supervision for two years, and ordered that he pay $180 in restitution. The State,
alleging numerous violations of the conditions of his community supervision,
subsequently moved to adjudicate appellant’s guilt. After a hearing, the trial court
found several allegations true, found appellant guilty, and assessed his punishment
at confinement for two years. The trial court certified that this is not a plea-bargain
case and appellant has a right to appeal. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has moved to withdraw and filed a
brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal lacks 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. Id. 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 has informed the Court that he delivered to appellant a copy of the
brief and his motion to withdraw and informed appellant of his right to file a
response after obtaining access to the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313,
1
See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. §§ 481.102(6), 481.115(a), (b).
2
319–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2008). Counsel also provided appellant with a form motion to access the
record for his response, if any. See Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 319–20. Appellant has
not filed a response to his counsel’s Anders brief.
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
for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (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 petitioning 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.2 Attorney Greg Russell must immediately send appellant the required
2
Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal
and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of
3
notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P.
6.5(c).
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Landau, and Countiss.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App.
1997).
4