Jimmy Ray Shimek v. State
Jimmy Ray Shimek v. State
Opinion
PER CURIAM
The district court found appellant guilty of murder. The court assessed punishment at imprisonment for thirty-five years.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. A discussion of the contentions advanced in counsel's brief would serve no beneficial purpose.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and B. A. Smith
Affirmed
Filed: February 14, 1996
Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.