Sherrie Denise Wilson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 66th District Court of Hill County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-09-00040-CR SHERRIE DENISE WILSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No. 33,058 MEMORANDUM OPINION Sherrie Denise Wilson pled guilty to aggravated robbery of a disabled person, a first-degree felony, and received deferred adjudication community supervision for a period of ten years. The State later moved to proceed to final adjudication, alleging fourteen violations of her conditions of community supervision. Wilson pled true to ten of those allegations, which the trial court found true, as well as three others to which Wilson had pled not true. The trial court found Wilson guilty and sentenced her to twelve years imprisonment. Wilson s appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief, asserting that he has diligently reviewed the appellate record and that, in his opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Although informed of her right to do so, Wilson did not file a pro se brief or response. The State waived the filing of a brief. We will affirm. In an Anders case, we must, after a full examination of all the proceedings, [] decide whether the case is wholly frivolous. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is wholly frivolous or without merit when it lacks any basis in law or fact. McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988). We have conducted an independent review of the record, and because we find this appeal to be wholly frivolous, we affirm the judgment. Counsel must send Wilson a copy of our decision by certified mail, return receipt requested, at Wilson s last known address. TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4. Counsel must also notify Wilson of her right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Id.; see also Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670, 673-74 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). We grant counsel s motion to withdraw, effective upon counsel s compliance with the aforementioned notification requirement as evidenced by a letter [to this Court] certifying his compliance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4. REX D. DAVIS Justice Wilson v. State Page 2 Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Reyna, and Justice Davis (Chief Justice Gray concurs in the judgment to the extent it affirms the trial court s judgment only. A separate opinion will not issue.) Affirmed Opinion delivered and filed December 8, 2010 Do not publish [CR25] Wilson v. State Page 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.
