Jason Charles James v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 21st District Court of Lee County

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-10-00623-CR Jason Charles James, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LEE COUNTY, 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 7099, HONORABLE H. R. TOWSLEE, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Jason Charles James pleaded guilty to tampering with physical evidence. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 37.09 (West Supp. 2010). He also admitted the two previous felony convictions alleged for enhancement. The district court adjudged him guilty and assessed punishment at twenty-five years imprisonment. Appellant s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel s brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. A pro se brief has been filed. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. See Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous. The issues raised in appellant s pro se response to counsel s Anders brief have no arguable merit. See Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 767; Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827. Counsel s motion to withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. ___________________________________________ J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Henson and Goodwin Affirmed Filed: March 17, 2011 Do Not Publish 2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.