Opinion
03-21-00127-CR
04-26-2022
Roseanne Lupita Sheppard, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
DO NOT PUBLISH
FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. 82380, THE HONORABLE JOHN GAUNTT, JUDGE PRESIDING
Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Kelly
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Appellant Roseanne Lupita Sheppard pleaded guilty to evading arrest or detention with a vehicle and was placed by the trial court on deferred adjudication community supervision for a period of six years. See Tex. Penal Code § 38.04(b)(2)(A); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42A.101. She now seeks to appeal from the trial court's deferred-adjudication order.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988). Appellant's counsel has certified to this Court that he sent copies of the motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response, and provided a motion to assist appellant in obtaining the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Anders, 386 U.S. at 744.
We have conducted an independent review of the record-including the record of the plea and sentencing proceedings below and appellate counsel's brief-and find no reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents no arguably meritorious grounds for review, and the appeal is frivolous.
Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The trial court's order of deferred adjudication is affirmed.
Affirmed