Kathy Meeks a/k/a Kathy Schmidt v. The State of Texas Appeal from 42nd District Court of Taylor County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed May 9, 2019 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________ No. 11-18-00262-CR ___________ KATHY DEANN MEEKS A/K/A KATHY DEANN SCHMIDT, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 42nd District Court Taylor County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 27612A MEMORANDUM OPINION Based upon an open plea of guilty and a plea of true to two prior state jail felony convictions, the trial court convicted Appellant of the state jail felony offense of possession of methamphetamine and assessed Appellant’s punishment, pursuant to the applicable enhanced range of punishment, at confinement for ten years and a fine of $750. The trial court suspended the imposition of the sentence and placed Appellant on community supervision for ten years. We affirm. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, a copy of the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and an explanatory letter. Counsel advised Appellant of her right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. Counsel also advised Appellant of her right to file a petition for discretionary review in order to seek review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Appellant has not filed a response to counsel’s Anders brief. Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. 1 We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court. May 9, 2019 PER CURIAM Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.2 Willson, J., not participating. 1 We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Rule 68 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. 2 Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment. 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.
