Gary Franklin v. State ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •        TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-05-00184-CR
    Gary Franklin, Appellant
    v.
    The State of Texas, Appellee
    FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
    NO. 933724, HONORABLE MICHAEL LYNCH, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant Gary Franklin was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision
    after he pleaded guilty to sexual assault of a child. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.011 (West Supp.
    2005). The district court later revoked supervision, adjudicated appellant guilty, and imposed a fifty-
    four-month prison sentence. This appeal followed.1
    Appellant’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
    frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
    1
    The trial court initially certified that this was a plea bargain case and Franklin had no right of
    appeal. In response to an order from this Court, the trial court corrected the certification to indicate
    that Franklin had the right to appeal issues unrelated to the conviction. The court of criminal appeals
    has since made it clear that defendants who receive deferred adjudication pursuant to a plea bargain
    have a right of appeal following adjudication. See Hargesheimer v. State, 
    182 S.W.3d 906
    , 913
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).
    arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 
    488 U.S. 75
    (1988); High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 
    516 S.W.2d 684
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
    Jackson v. State, 
    485 S.W.2d 553
    (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 
    436 S.W.2d 137
    (Tex.
    Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to
    examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief or other written response to
    counsel’s brief has been filed.
    We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
    and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel’s
    motion to withdraw is granted.
    The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
    __________________________________________
    Bob Pemberton, Justice
    Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Patterson and Pemberton
    Affirmed
    Filed: June 30, 2006
    Do Not Publish
    2