Opinion
NO. 09-11-00177-CR
08-10-2011
RICHARD E. SMITH, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 09-06809
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Richard E. Smith pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance, namely cocaine. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Smith guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Smith on community supervision for five years, and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Smith's unadjudicated community supervision. Smith pleaded "true" to three violations of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Smith had violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Smith guilty of possession of a controlled substance, and assessed punishment at two years of confinement in a state jail facility.
Smith'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 May 5, 2011, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant. We 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.
Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
AFFIRMED.
____________
DAVID GAULTNEY
Justice
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.