Roland Hill v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 167th District Court of Travis County
Annotate this CaseNO. 03-96-00025-CR
NO. 03-96-00026-CR
Roland Hill, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NOS. 0954612 & 0940499, HONORABLE MIKE LYNCH, JUDGE PRESIDING
PER CURIAM
These are appeals from judgments of conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the records demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the records and counsel's brief and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Before Justices Powers, Jones and Kidd
Affirmed
Filed: February 27, 1997
Do Not Publish
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.