In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-20-00075-CR

REBECCA DALE CARTER BRANCH, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 124th District Court Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 47723-B

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.

ORDER Rebecca Dale Carter Branch was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to twenty months’ confinement. She is currently housed in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), Murray Unit, 1916 North Highway 36 Bypass, Gatesville, Texas.

Following Branch’s conviction, she exercised her right to appeal, and an attorney was appointed to represent her on appeal. Branch’s appointed appellate counsel recently filed a brief citing Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), claiming to have found no meritorious grounds upon which to challenge Branch’s conviction and sentence.

Under Anders and its progeny, Branch has a constitutional right to review the entire appellate record and to file a pro se response to her attorney’s Anders brief. Id. at 745; see also Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Branch has indicated her desire to file a pro se response, and her appointed attorney sent her a paper copy of the appellate record.

However, the record also contains a digitally recorded electronic exhibit that Branch is entitled to review. The electronic exhibit is twenty-two minutes and six seconds long, is in the .mkv format, and can be played on any standard multimedia player—such as VLC Media Player or Windows Media Player—routinely found on any laptop computer.

This Court is ultimately responsible for ensuring that Branch’s constitutional rights under Anders and its progeny are protected. In furtherance of our responsibility and in an effort to work with the Murray Unit, we asked our clerk to contact prison officials to determine if they would be willing to provide Branch with a manner and means of reviewing the electronic exhibit that is part of her appellate record. We were originally informed that the Murray Unit has no

means of allowing inmates to review digitally recorded files. When we pressed the officials on the constitutional importance of allowing Branch to review the exhibit, we were told that officials were awaiting a response from the warden of the Murray Unit. We advised the prison officials that we would prepare an order if necessary, though we preferred to resolve the situation without the need for an order. It has now been twenty days since we first started communicating with officials from the Murray Unit, and this situation remains unresolved.

We recognize that the Murray Unit, like all TDCJ units, must maintain a set of procedures to assure the safety of both its staff and its inmates, and our intent is not to affect the safe and efficient operation of this institution. That said, we are confident that prison officials can safely provide Branch access to a computer containing a multimedia player that will allow her to review the twenty-two-minute recorded exhibit that is included in her appellate record.

Accordingly, the warden of the Murray Unit is hereby ordered, either personally or through his agents or employees, to 1. provide Branch a means for meaningful review of the contents of the digitally recorded exhibit that is part of her appellate record, a copy of which is saved on a flash drive that is included with this order; 2. inform the clerk of this Court of the date and time when Branch was given the opportunity to review the exhibit; and 3. comply with the dictates of this order on or before February 18, 2021.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT Date: February 4, 2021