From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hudson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Oct 12, 2011
NO. 09-10-00581-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 12, 2011)

Opinion

NO. 09-10-00581-CRNO. 09-10-00582-CR

10-12-2011

ISAAC HUDSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Orange County, Texas

Trial Cause Nos. E-101571, E-101496


MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury found Isaac Hudson guilty of criminal trespass and possession of marihuana and assessed punishment at five days in county jail for the trespass offense and 120 days in county jail for the possession offense. We affirm the judgments.

On appeal, Hudson's counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and that concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On June 30, 2011, we granted an extension of time for the appellant to file a pro se brief. Hudson has not filed a response.

We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an 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 judgments.

Appellant may challenge our decision in these cases by filing petitions for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.

AFFIRMED.

___________________________

HOLLIS HORTON

Justice
Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.


Summaries of

Hudson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Oct 12, 2011
NO. 09-10-00581-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Hudson v. State

Case Details

Full title:ISAAC HUDSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont

Date published: Oct 12, 2011

Citations

NO. 09-10-00581-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 12, 2011)