Dennis Michael Rainford Jr. v. State
Dennis Michael Rainford Jr. v. State
Opinion
PER CURIAM
Appellant's court-appointed counsel tendered a brief stating that the appeal in this cause is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel failed, however, to certify that he delivered a copy of the brief to appellant, and that he advised appellant of his right to examine the record and file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. Counsel did not respond to a notice by the Clerk seeking to resolve this problem informally.
Counsel for appellant, Mr. Gary Taylor, if he has not already done so, is ordered to deliver a copy of his brief to appellant and to advise him of his right to examine the record and file a pro se brief. Counsel shall notify this Court in writing that he has complied with this order no later than May 2, 2003.
It is ordered April 21, 2003.
Before Justices Kidd, Yeakel and Patterson
Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.