Court Opinion

ID: 4315830
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-09-26 23:37:41.50823+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:17:39.267363
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                   Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                               ________________

                              NO. 09-17-00397-CR
                               ________________

                  JEFFREY ANDREW BRYANT, Appellant

                                        V.

                  THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 258th District Court
                         Polk County, Texas
                        Trial Cause No. 25142
__________________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      A jury found appellant Jeffrey Andrew Bryant guilty of possession of child

pornography. The trial court assessed Bryant’s punishment as an habitual felony

offender at twenty-five years of imprisonment.

      Bryant’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.
1978). On June 11, 2018, we granted an extension of time for Bryant to file a pro se

brief. We received no response from Bryant.

      We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion

that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d
503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

      AFFIRMED.

                                              ______________________________
                                                     STEVE McKEITHEN
                                                         Chief Justice

Submitted on September 19, 2018
Opinion Delivered September 26, 2018
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.

      1
        Bryant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.