Jackson v. State
Tex. Crim. App.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Citations by decade
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2020Donald Kenneth Mitchell v. State Tex. App.
- 2020Joseph Lee Hill v. State Tex. App.
- 2019In re Interest of D.C. Tex. App. Ct.
- 2018Marcus Degrazia v. State Tex. App.
- 2018Robert Allan Jones v. State Tex. App.
- 2018Kasey Carter v. State Tex. App.
- 2017Leandre Morris III v. State Tex. App.
- 2016Amador Fernandez v. State Tex. App.
- 2016Torrance Ray Evans, Jr. v. State Tex. App.
- 2016In the Interest of X.A.H.-B. Tex. App.
Cites 2 cases
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
Joe Barron “Jo Jo” JACKSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Attorneys
- R. V. Hebisen, Houston, for appellant.
- Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James C. Brough and Bert Graham, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty. and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for the sale of heroin; the punishment assessed, twelve years imprisonment.
The indigent appellant, who was represented in the trial court and on this appeal by appointed counsel, was found guilty by the trial court upon his plea of guilty.
The appellant’s counsel has filed a brief concluding that: “The record reflects no reversible error and there are no points of error upon which an appeal can be predicated.”
The record reflects that the appellant and his counsel appeared before the trial court, at which time the appellant was presented with a copy of the appellate brief and he was informed of his right to file a supplemental brief in his own behalf and of his right to the use of a copy of the trial record. The appellant has not filed a brief in his own behalf.
We find a compliance with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967) and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Cr.App.1969).
The record before us has been examined and we find that the appeal is frivolous.
The judgment is affirmed.
Opinion approved 'by the Court.