Opinion issued July 1, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The

First District of Texas

NO. 01-12-01041-CR

____________

ABRAHAM JHAMELL JACKSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1312812

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Abraham Jhamell Jackson, pleaded guilty to the offense of sexual 

assault of a child, with no agreed recommendation from the State regarding 
2

punishment. The trial court judge deferred adjudication and appellant was placed 

on community supervision for 5 years. Following a hearing on State’s Petition for 

Revocation of Probated Sentence on alleged violations of probation, the trial court 

revoked appellant’s probation and sentenced him to 15 years with the Texas 

Department of Criminal Justice.

Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, 

along with an Anders brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and 

therefore the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). 

Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional 

evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal 

authority. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 

573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that she has 

thoroughly reviewed the record and that she is unable to advance any grounds of 

error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell 

v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

Counsel has informed us that she has delivered a copy of the brief to 

appellant and informed him of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a 
3

response. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 408 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).

Appellant has not filed a response.

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we 

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, that there are no arguable 

grounds for review, and that therefore the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. 

at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—

determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly 

frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009)

(explaining that frivolity is determined by considering whether there are “arguable 

grounds” for review); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2005) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review exist); 

Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines whether arguable grounds 

exist by reviewing entire record). An appellant may challenge a holding that there 

are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in 

the Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to 

withdraw.1 Attorney Patti Sedita must immediately send the notice required by 

 

1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal 

and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of 

Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1997).
4

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the 

Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Brown.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).