Opinion
NO. 09-14-00063-CR
10-08-2014
JONATHON JERMAINE RICHMOND, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 09-06845
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Jonathon Jermaine Richmond was indicted for the felony offense of abandoning a child, enhanced by three prior felony convictions. Under a plea bargain agreement, Richmond pleaded guilty. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to substantiate Richmond's guilt, deferred further proceedings, and placed Richmond on community supervision for ten years and assessed a $1000 fine. The State later filed a Motion to Revoke Unadjudicated Probation, and Richmond pleaded "true" to two of the alleged violations of the terms of his community supervision. Finding four of the alleged violations true, the trial court granted the motion to revoke and sentenced Richmond to sixty-five years in prison. The trial court subsequently vacated the judgment and the sentence and reinstated Richmond's community supervision. Several months later, the State filed a Third Amended Motion to Revoke. At the hearing on the Third Amended Motion to Revoke, Richmond pleaded "true" to alleged violations of his community supervision. The trial court revoked Richmond's community supervision and sentenced him to twenty years in prison.
Richmond was also indicted for aggravated kidnapping, enhanced by three prior felony convictions. As part of the plea agreement on the abandonment offense, the State chose not to pursue the kidnapping charge.
Richmond's appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes Richmond's appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We granted an extension of time for Richmond to file a pro se brief, but we received no response from Richmond. We have determined that Richmond's appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the clerk's record, and we agree that no arguable issues support the appeal. 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.
Richmond may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
--------
AFFIRMED.
/s/_________
LEANNE JOHNSON
Justice
Submitted on October 1, 2014
Opinion Delivered October 8, 2014
Do Not Publish
Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.