Court Opinion

ID: 2860412
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 20:32:17.902097+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:10.984621
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-95-00169-CR

Jimmy Ray Shimek, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 8090, HONORABLE JOHN L. PLACKE, JUDGE PRESIDING

PER CURIAM

	The district court found appellant guilty of murder.  The court assessed punishment
at imprisonment for thirty-five years.

	Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief in which he concludes that the
appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738 (1967), by advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the
appeal.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Currie v. State,
516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.
1978).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his
right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.

	We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  A discussion of the contentions advanced in counsel's brief would
serve no beneficial purpose.

	The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and B. A. Smith

Affirmed

Filed:   February 14, 1996

Do Not Publish