From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Apt v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Feb 27, 2013
No. 04-12-00347-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 27, 2013)

Opinion

No. 04-12-00347-CR

02-27-2013

Allison T. APT, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee


MEMORANDUM OPINION


From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR9982W

Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Karen Angelini, Justice Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
AFFIRMED

On December 12, 2011, pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Allison Apt was sentenced to two years of imprisonment, her sentence was then suspended, and she was placed on community supervision for a period of four years. On May 14, 2012, the State filed a motion to revoke Apt's community supervision. At the revocation hearing, Apt pled true to having violated a condition of her community supervision. The trial court then found that Apt had violated a condition of her community supervision and sentenced her to six months in a state jail facility. Apt timely filed a notice of appeal. Her court-appointed appellate attorney has filed a brief in which she raises two arguable points of error, but nonetheless concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel states that appellant was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw, and was further informed of her right to review the record and file her own brief. See Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Apt did not file a pro se brief.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant the motion to withdraw. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, she must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the later of (1) the date of this opinion; or (2) the date the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.

Karen Angelini, Justice Do not publish


Summaries of

Apt v. State

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Feb 27, 2013
No. 04-12-00347-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 27, 2013)
Case details for

Apt v. State

Case Details

Full title:Allison T. APT, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

Date published: Feb 27, 2013

Citations

No. 04-12-00347-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 27, 2013)