Full Opinion

Opinion issued July 23, 2026 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00747-CR ——————————— CHERYL KINDELL, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 412nd District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 103211-CR MEMORANDUM OPINION A jury found appellant, Cheryl Kindell, guilty of the felony offenses of bribery and possession of a prohibited substance in a correctional facility. See TEX. PENAL CODE §§ 36.02, 38.11. The jury assessed punishment at three years’ confinement and a $500 fine for the bribery charge and five years’ confinement and a $500 fine for the possession charge. The jury recommended the sentences be suspended and the trial court placed the appellant on six years’ community supervision for each offense. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal authority. 386 U.S. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal and conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable grounds for review 2 exist). We note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6. We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. Attorney Perry Stevens must immediately send appellant the required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(c). Among other requirements, the notice must inform the appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Gunn, and Morgan. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 3