Demarius La Ryone Jefferson v. The State of Texas Appeal from 258th District Court of Polk County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________ NO. 09-15-00411-CR ________________ DEMARIUS LA RYONE JEFFERSON V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 258th District Court Polk County, Texas Trial Cause No. 24,125 __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found appellant Demarius La Ryone Jefferson guilty of aggravated kidnapping as an habitual felony offender and assessed punishment at thirty years of imprisonment. Jefferson’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On June 16, 2016, we granted an extension of time for Jefferson to file a pro se brief. Jefferson filed a pro se brief in response. The Court of Criminal Appeals 1 has held that we need not address the merits of issues raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate court may determine: (1) “that the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error[;]” or (2) “that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues.” Id. We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. See id. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.1 AFFIRMED. ______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on March 6, 2017 Opinion Delivered March 15, 2017 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ. 1 Jefferson may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 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.
