Fields v. State, 10-21-00275-CR

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
Writing for the CourtMATT JOHNSON Justice
PartiesJESSE NOLAN FIELDS, JR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Docket Number10-21-00275-CR
Decision Date22 November 2022



No. 10-21-00275-CR

Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District

November 22, 2022

Do not publish

From the 82nd District Court Falls County, Texas Trial Court No. 10468

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith



Jesse Nolan Fields, Jr., appeals from the adjudication of his guilt for family violence assault by impeding breath or circulation, which previously had been deferred, and from his resulting ten-year sentence. We affirm the trial court's judgment as modified.

Fields's appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw and an Anders brief in support of the motion 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). Counsel's brief evidences a professional evaluation of the


record for error and compliance with the other duties of appointed counsel. We conclude that counsel has performed the duties required of appointed counsel. See id. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978); see also Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407-09 (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." Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; see Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80, 109 S.Ct. 346, 349-50, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988); 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, 438 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 (1988).

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief. While we conclude that there is no error that would require reversal of Fields's conviction or sentence, we have determined that the trial court's judgment adjudicating Fields's guilt includes what we identify as a Category 3 nonreversible error-an "unassigned, nonreversible error that has been preserved at trial or that is not subject to procedural default." See Cummins v. State, 646 S.W.3d 605, 617 (Tex. App.-Waco 2022, pet. ref'd).

The trial court's judgment adjudicating Fields's guilt includes the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT