Brandy Nichole Smith v. The State of Texas Appeal from 43rd District Court of Parker County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-17-00343-CR ___________________________ BRANDY NICHOLE SMITH, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 43rd District Court Parker County, Texas Trial Court No. CR17-0107 Before Sudderth, C.J.; Walker and Kerr, JJ. Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth MEMORANDUM OPINION1 Appellant Brandy Nichole Smith appeals her conviction of theft with two prior theft convictions, for which she was sentenced to twenty-four months’ confinement in state jail and a $1,000 fine. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.35 (West Supp. 2017) (providing that state jail punishment range is confinement from 180 days to two years and up to a $10,000 fine), § 31.03(a), (e)(4)(D) (West Supp. 2017) (providing that theft—the unlawful appropriation of property with intent to deprive its owner thereof—is a state jail felony if the stolen property’s value is less than $2,500 and the defendant has been previously convicted two or more times of any grade of theft). Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744–45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967). Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. Id., 87 S. Ct. at 1400. Appellant had the opportunity to file a pro se response to the Anders brief but has not done so; the State has not filed a brief. Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court must independently examine the record. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. 1 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988). We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment. /s/ Bonnie Sudderth Bonnie Sudderth Chief Justice Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) Delivered: September 13, 2018 3
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.
