From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Belford v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Aug 7, 2008
No. 13-07-215-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 7, 2008)

Opinion

No. 13-07-215-CR

Opinion delivered and filed August 7, 2008. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

On appeal from the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

Before Chief Justice VALDEZ and Justices YAÑEZ and BENAVIDES.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant, David Belford, pleaded guilty to theft. The trial court deferred adjudication and placed appellant on community supervision for five years. Less than a year later, at a hearing on the State's motion to revoke, appellant pleaded "true" to each of the State's allegations that he had violated the terms of his community supervision. The trial court revoked appellant's community supervision, adjudicated him guilty, and assessed punishment at two years in a State Jail facility and a fine of $1,500. Appellant's counsel has filed a brief with this Court asserting there is no basis for appeal. We agree and affirm the trial court's judgment.

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03 (Vernon Supp. 2007).

See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).

Anders Brief

Counsel's brief reveals that she has reviewed the clerk's record and reporter's record in this case and has concluded that appellant's appeal presents no issues which warrant appellate review. The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation showing why there are no arguable grounds for advancing an appeal. In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 813 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978), counsel has carefully discussed why, under controlling authority, there are no errors in the trial court's judgment. Appellant's counsel states that she informed appellant of his right to review the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. More than thirty days have passed, and no pro se brief has been filed. Upon receiving a "frivolous appeal" brief, the appellate courts must conduct "a full examination of all the proceedings to decide whether the case is wholly frivolous." We have carefully reviewed the appellate record and counsel's brief. We agree with appellant's counsel that the appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Motion to Withdraw

In accordance with Anders, counsel has asked permission to withdraw as counsel for appellant. An appellate court may grant counsel's motion to withdraw filed in connection with an Anders brief. We grant counsel's motion to withdraw. We order counsel to advise appellant promptly of the disposition of this case and the availability of discretionary review.


Summaries of

Belford v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg
Aug 7, 2008
No. 13-07-215-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 7, 2008)
Case details for

Belford v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID BELFORD Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi — Edinburg

Date published: Aug 7, 2008

Citations

No. 13-07-215-CR (Tex. App. Aug. 7, 2008)