Julia Helene Finley v. The State of TexasAppeal from 181st District Court of Randall County (memorandum opinion by chief justice quinn)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-13-00284-CR JULIA HELENE FINLEY, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 181st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 23941-B, Honorable Lee Waters, Presiding December 18, 2013 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ. Appellant, Julia Helene Finley, appeals her conviction for felony theft. Appellant pled guilty without the benefit of a plea bargain. She had the trial court assess punishment which was assessed at twelve years in prison. Appellant appealed. Appellant s appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw, together with an Anders1 brief, wherein he certified that, after diligently searching the record, he concluded that the appeal was without merit. Along with his brief, appellate counsel 1 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct.1396,18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). filed a copy of a letter sent to appellant informing her of counsel s belief that there was no reversible error and of appellant s right to file a response pro se. By letter dated November 6, 2013, this court notified appellant of her right to file her own brief or response by December 6, 2013, if she wished to do so. Appellant filed a response wherein she requested the appointment of new appellate counsel and challenged her sentence. In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel discussed two potential areas for appeal which included voluntariness of her guilty plea and ineffective assistance of counsel. However, counsel then proceeded to explain why the issues were without merit. In addition, we conducted our own review of the record to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel s conclusions and to uncover any arguable error pursuant to In re Shulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 508 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We also reviewed appellant s complaint about her sentence. Upon undertaking these tasks, we too find no arguable error supported by the record before us. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted and the judgment is affirmed. 2 Furthermore, appellant s request for new appellate counsel is denied as moot. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 2 Appellant has the right to file a petition for discretionary review with the Court of Criminal Appeals. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
