Frank Howard McMarion v. State
Date Filed2014-12-23
Docket03-14-00143-CR
Cited0 times
StatusPublished
Full Opinion (html_with_citations)
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00140-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00141-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00142-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00143-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00144-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 23, 2014
NO. 03-14-00145-CR
Frank Howard McMarion, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
APPEAL FROM THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN
AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES
This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed
the record and the partiesā arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in
the district courtās judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the district courtās
judgment of conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication
of costs is made.