Jason Lloyd Shaunesey v. The State of Texas Appeal from 163rd District Court of Orange County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________ NO. 09-23-00202-CR ________________ JASON LLOYD SHAUNESEY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 163rd District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. B220398-R ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Jason Lloyd Shaunesey was charged with possession of between four and 200 grams of methamphetamine, a second-degree felony. Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(d). Because of Shaunesey’s prior criminal record, the charge was enhanced to a first-degree felony. Tex. Penal Code § 12.42(b). Shaunesey pleaded “guilty,” and the trial court sentenced him to 20 years in the 1 Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. This appeal followed. Shaunesey’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous; he also filed a motion to withdraw as counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On October 24, 2023, we notified Appellant of his right to file a pro se brief and notified him of the December 27, 2023, deadline for doing so. Appellant requested a 60-day extension of the deadline for filing his pro se brief, and we granted him an extension until January 26, 2024, but we received no response from Appellant. We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeal. 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. Submitted on February 29, 2024 Opinion Delivered March 6, 2024 Do Not Publish JAY WRIGHT Justice Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Wright, JJ. Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2 1
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.
