Suff v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ODOM, Judge.
Appellants, husband and wife, were tried together upon their pleas of not guilty and convicted of the murder of their infant daughter. A jury assessed punishment at seventy years for each.
Appellant William Suff’s appointed attorneys have filed a brief in which they conclude that his appeal is frivolous. He has been so informed and has exercised his right to file a pro se brief. This procedure is in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and Gainous v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 436 S.W.2d 137. Appellant Teryl Suff urges one ground…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gainous v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1969
- Wood v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Middleton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1919
- Creel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Valdez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Wygal v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Tarpley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
- Freeman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1983
- Mendoza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.