Opinion
No. 06-19-00154-CR
10-31-2019
BRONTE FRANKLIN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 4th District Court Rusk County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR17-201 Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On September 14, 2018, Bronte Franklin, pursuant to a plea agreement, pled guilty to aggravated assault and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for a period of five years. On March 27, 2019, the State moved to revoke Franklin's community supervision and to proceed to an adjudication of his guilt, alleging two distinct violations of Franklin's community supervision. Franklin pled true to both of the allegations and, after an evidentiary hearing, the trial court granted the State's motion. Franklin was sentenced to six years' incarceration. Franklin appeals.
Franklin's attorney filed a brief which states that he has reviewed the record and has found no genuinely arguable issue that could be raised on appeal. The brief sets out the procedural history of the case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceedings. Meeting the requirements of Anders v. California, counsel has provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743-44 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.
On August 15, 2019, counsel mailed to Franklin copies of counsel's brief, counsel's motion to withdraw, the reporter's record, and the clerk's record. Also on August 15, 2019, this Court notified Franklin that any pro se response he wished to file was due on September 16, 2019. On September 26, 2019, this Court informed Franklin that the case would be set for submission on the briefs on October 17, 2019. Franklin did not file a pro se response and did not request an extension of time in which to file such a response.
We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the entire appellate record and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial court's judgment. Id.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Since we agree that this case presents no reversible error, we also, in accordance with Anders, grant counsel's request to withdraw from further representation of appellant in this case. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant desire to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review (1) must be filed within thirty days from either the date of this opinion or the date on which the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2, (2) must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3, and (3) should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, see TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.
Ralph K. Burgess
Justice Date Submitted: October 17, 2019
Date Decided: October 31, 2019 Do Not Publish