Elizabeth Michelle Drury v. The State of Texas Appeal from 411th District Court of Polk County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 2, 2014. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-14-00531-CR ELIZABETH MICHELLE DRURY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 411th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 22399 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of sexual assault of a child. The trial court deferred adjudicating guilt and placed appellant on community supervision for a period of ten years and assessed a $2,500 fine. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt. A hearing was conducted and appellant pled “true” to the State’s allegations. The trial court found the allegations to be true, adjudicated guilt, and sentenced appellant to confinement for sixteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a 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 requirement of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and 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 and the record was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. (Tex. Crim. App.1991). 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. We are not to address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Jamison and Donovan. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 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.
