AFFIRMED and Opinion Filed December 28, 2022

In the

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-22-00094-CR

No. 05-22-00095-CR

JESSICA NICOLE SHEREN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 2020-1-0623, 2021-1-0630

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Molberg, Partida-Kipness, and Carlyle

Opinion by Justice Carlyle

Jessica Nicole Sheren appeals her convictions of two counts of misdemeanor 

family violence assault.

1 After a bench trial, the trial court sentenced her to two 

hundred days’ confinement on each count, to run concurrently. 

Ms. Sheren’s attorney has filed a brief in which he concludes Ms. Sheren’s 

appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.2 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 

 

1

See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.01(a).

2 Although counsel’s brief complied with Anders, it is unclear whether counsel complied with the 

requirements imposed by Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Regardless, the 
–2–

738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record and shows 

why there are no arguable grounds for an appeal. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 

812 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) (determining whether brief meets 

requirements of Anders). We advised Ms. Sheren of her right to file a pro se 

response, and she has not filed a response. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–

21 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (noting appellant has right to file pro se response to 

Anders brief filed by counsel).

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 

S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in 

Anders cases). We agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit, finding nothing 

in the record that might arguably support the appeal. We therefore affirm the trial 

court’s judgment.

220094f.u05

220095f.u05

Do Not Publish

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b)

 

Clerk of Court sent Ms. Sheren a letter, attaching copies of counsel’s brief and motion to withdraw, 

informing Ms. Sheren of her rights and addressing any deficiencies in counsel’s correspondence. Under 

these circumstances, any failure by counsel to comply with Kelly’s requirements is harmless.

/Cory L. Carlyle/

CORY L. CARLYLE

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

JESSICA NICOLE SHEREN, 

Appellant

No. 05-22-00094-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 1, Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2020-1-0623.

Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. 

Justices Molberg and Partida-Kipness 

participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 28th day of December, 2022.
–4–

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

JESSICA NICOLE SHEREN, 

Appellant

No. 05-22-00095-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 1, Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2021-1-0630.

Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. 

Justices Molberg and Partida-Kipness 

participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered this 28th day of December, 2022.