Opinion
No. 04-03-00227-CR
Delivered and Filed: September 22, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2002-CR-0222, Honorable Mary Román, Judge Presiding. Affirmed; Motion to Withdraw Granted.
Sitting: Catherine STONE, Justice, Paul W. GREEN, Justice, Sarah B. DUNCAN, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Daniel Berkowitz pleaded nolo contendere to possessing a controlled substance. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, the trial court found Berkowitz guilty, suspended the imposition of sentence, and placed him on community supervision for four years. The State later filed a motion to revoke, alleging Berkowitz violated the conditions of his community supervision. At a hearing on the motion, Berkowitz pleaded true to several of the alleged violations. The trial court revoked Berkowitz's community supervision, imposed a $1,000.00 fine, and sentenced Berkowitz to four years imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — Institutional Division. Berkowitz appeals. Berkowitz's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which he concludes this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969). Berkowitz has not filed a pro se brief. We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127, 128 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1979) (holding that plea of true to violation of a condition of probation is alone sufficient to support revocation and imposition of sentence); Brooks v. State, 995 S.W.2d 762, 763 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1999, no pet.) (same). We therefore affirm the trial court's judgment and grant the motion to withdraw filed by Berkowitz's counsel. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1997, no pet.).