No. 13-07-338-CR
Opinion delivered and filed August 13, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
On appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.
Before Chief Justice VALDEZ and Justices YAÑEZ and BENAVIDES.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice YAÑEz.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant, Donna Kay Reed, pleaded guilty on October 10, 2006 to the offense of forgery. The trial court assessed punishment at two years' confinement in state jail, plus a fine and restitution, suspended the sentence, and placed appellant on community supervision for five years. On March 6, 2007, the State filed a motion to revoke appellant's community supervision. Following a hearing, the trial court revoked appellant's community supervision, and imposed the two-year state jail sentence. Appellant appeals the revocation of her community supervision. Appellant's appellate counsel, concluding that there are "no reasonably arguable factual or evidentiary issues disclosed by the record in this case which would rise to the level of reversible error," filed an Anders brief, in which she reviewed the merits, or lack thereof, of the appeal. We affirm.
See id. § 12.35 (Vernon Supp. 2008).
We note that the record contains the trial court's certification, which states that this case "is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2 (a)(2).
I. Discussion
Pursuant to Anders v. California, appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief with this Court, stating that her review of the record yielded no grounds or error upon which an appeal can be predicated. Although counsel's brief does not advance any arguable grounds of error, it does present a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. In compliance with High v. State, appellant's counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there are no errors in the trial court's judgment. Counsel has informed this Court that she has: (1) examined the record and found no arguable grounds to advance on appeal, (2) served a copy of the brief and counsel's motion to withdraw on appellant, and (3) informed appellant of her right to review the record and to file a pro se response. More than an adequate period of time has passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se response. II. Independent Review
Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the case is wholly frivolous. We have reviewed the entire record and counsel's brief and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. III. Motion to Withdraw
In accordance with Anders, appellant's attorney has asked this Court for permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw. Within five days of the date of this Court's opinion, counsel is ordered to send a copy of the opinion and judgment to appellant and to advise appellant of her right to file a petition for discretionary review.