Barksdale, Tracy Troy v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 23rd District Court of Brazoria County

Annotate this Case
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 20, 2005

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 20, 2005.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-05-00244-CR

____________

TRACY TROY BARKSDALE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 23rd District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 46,713

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance in a correctional facility. Appellant entered a plea of true to the enhancement paragraphs in the indictment. On December 10, 2004 the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for fourteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice in accordance with the punishment assessed by the jury. Appellant filed a timely, written notice of appeal.


Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was provided a copy of the appellate record and advised of the right to file a pro se response to counsel=s brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Appellant was granted an extension of time until September 30, 2005, to file a pro se response to counsel=s brief. As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed October 20, 2005.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Anderson.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

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.