Harold Dean Pursley v. State of Texas
Harold Dean Pursley v. State of Texas
Opinion
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in each cause concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The briefs meet the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). A copy of each 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 records and counsel's briefs and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeals.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Marilyn Aboussie, Chief Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Kidd and Smith
Affirmed
Filed: April 6, 2000
Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.