No. 13-09-00087-CR
Delivered and filed August 25, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.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 GARZA.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice YAÑEZ.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant, Jay Brady Collums, pleaded guilty to retaliation, a third-degree felony, and was placed on deferred-adjudication community supervision for five years. The State filed a motion to revoke appellant's community supervision, alleging multiple violations of the terms of community supervision. Appellant pleaded "not true" to the allegations. Following a hearing, the trial court found appellant violated various conditions of his community supervision, revoked his community supervision, adjudicated him guilty of the underlying offense, and sentenced him to ten years' confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The trial court certified appellant's right to appeal, and this appeal followed. We affirm.
I. Anders Brief
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief with this Court stating that his 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 he 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 his 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 his right to file a petition for discretionary review.