Opinion
No. 09-10-00570-CR
Submitted on April 29, 2011.
Opinion Delivered May 11, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH.
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court, Jefferson County, Texas, Trial Cause No. 10-08574.
Before GAULTNEY, KREGER, and HORTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Danna Christine Houk a/k/a Danna C. Houk pleaded guilty to attempting to possess a controlled substance by fraud. The trial court found Houk guilty and assessed punishment at ten years of confinement, then suspended imposition of sentence and placed Houk on community supervision for ten years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Houk's community supervision. Houk pleaded "true" to one violation of the terms of the community supervision order. The trial court found that Houk violated the terms of the community supervision order, revoked Houk's community supervision, and imposed a sentence of ten years of confinement. Houk's appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On January 20, 2011, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant. We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgment. AFFIRMED.
Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.