From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rawlinson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Seventh District, Amarillo, Panel B
Mar 30, 2010
No. 07-09-0328-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 30, 2010)

Opinion

No. 07-09-0328-CR

March 30, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appealed from the 242nd District Court of Hale County; No. B16043-0505; Hon. Ed Self, Presiding.

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.


Anders Opinion


Robert Rawlinson, Jr. (appellant) appeals an order revoking his probation and ordering that he serve two years in a state jail facility. He had previously pled guilty to burglary of a building and was placed on two years deferred adjudication probation. The State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate appellant's guilt, which the trial court granted, and sentenced appellant to two years in a state jail facility. However, the court suspended sentence and placed appellant on community supervision for five years. The State, again, filed a motion alleging appellant had violated his community supervision. The trial court revoked appellant's probation and sentenced him to two years in a state jail facility. His appellate counsel moved to withdraw and filed an Anders brief in conjunction with that motion. In the brief, he represents that, after conducting a diligent search, he found no meritorious issues warranting appeal. Along with his brief, appellate counsel sent appellant a letter informing him of his conclusions and his right to file a pro se response or brief. We too informed appellant, by letter, of his right to appear via a pro se response or brief no later than March 22, 2010. To date, no response has been filed. In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel illustrated why the appeal was meritless. Appellant pled true to the allegations in the State's motion. A plea of true standing alone supports a decision to revoke probation or adjudicate guilt. Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). We have also conducted our own review of the record, pursuant to Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel's conclusions and to uncover any error. That review failed to reveal any error. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744-45, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).

Appellant has the right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review from this opinion.


Summaries of

Rawlinson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Seventh District, Amarillo, Panel B
Mar 30, 2010
No. 07-09-0328-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 30, 2010)
Case details for

Rawlinson v. State

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT RAWLINSON, JR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Seventh District, Amarillo, Panel B

Date published: Mar 30, 2010

Citations

No. 07-09-0328-CR (Tex. App. Mar. 30, 2010)