Imogene Samone Braziel v. State of Texas
Imogene Samone Braziel v. State of Texas
Opinion
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the records 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 counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of her right to examine the appellate records and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the records and counsel's brief and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeals.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Mack Kidd, Justice
Before Justices Jones, Kidd and Patterson
Affirmed
Filed: January 6, 2000
Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.