Date: 08-09-2016

Case Style: Orlando William Santana v. The State of Texas

Case Number: 10-16-00028-CR

Judge: Al Scoggins

Court: IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Jarvis J. Parsons
Brazos County District Attorney's Office

Defendant's Attorney:

Kristen Jernigan

Description: Santana’s appointed counsel filed an Anders brief asserting that she has diligently
reviewed the appellate record and that, in her opinion, the appeal is frivolous. See Anders
v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel informed Santana of his right to submit a brief
on his own behalf. Santana did not file a brief. Counsel's brief evidences a professional
Santana v. State Page 2
evaluation of the record for error, and we conclude that counsel performed the duties
required of appointed counsel. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. at 744; High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); see also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2008).
In reviewing an Anders appeal, we must, "after a full examination of all the
proceedings, ... decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." See Anders v. California, 386
U.S. at; 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."

Outcome:

After a review of the entire record in this
appeal, we determine the appeal to be wholly frivolous. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:

Texas Department Of Corrections Offender Info