Brandon Master v. State ( 2015 )

NO. 04-15-00100-CR
IN THE
FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS
OF TEXAS
AT SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
BRANDON MASTER, Fj JJ^ ^
Appellant
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR PROSE
ACCESS TO THE APPELLATE RECORD
TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:
COMES NOW the Appellant in the above styled and numbered cause and
files this Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record.
I.
Appellant's appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and brief in
support of the motion, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
II.
The undersigned Appellant wishes to exercise his right to review the
appellate record in preparing his pro se response to the Anders brief that court-
appointed counsel has filed. The undersigned Appellant now moves this Court to
provide him with free, pro se access to the appellate record, including the clerk's
record and reporter's record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318-19 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2014).
III.
The undersigned Appellant is presently incarcerated and lacks access to a
computer. For that reason, he respectfully requests that a paper copy of the
appellate record be provided to him. He also asks for a 30-day extension of time to
file his pro se brief.
IV.
This motion is addressed to the Fourth Court of Appeals, Cadena-Reeves
Justice Center, 300 Dolorosa St., Suite 3200, San Antonio, Texas 78205. This
motion is delivered to the Fourth Court of Appeals by U.S. Mail, on this the 1(5*^
day of huotosk , 2015.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Appellant respectfully
prays that the Court grant this Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record.
Respectfully submitted,
Brandon Master
TDCJ# 01653759
Garza West Transfer Facility
4250 HWY 202
Beeville,TX 78102
APPELLANT PROSE
RR at 35). Appellant was alone in the apartment and said his girlfriend hadn't been
V
there for four days. (1 RRat 35-36)CSantiago found a pipe used for smoking
Icrack" or marijuana on Appellant's bed. (1 RR at 38Y/He also found a knife with
an eight-inch blade. (1 RR at 38). Appellant said the knife was his, but not the
pipe. (1 RR at 40). The knife was a violation of probation because Appellant was
not supposed to possess any weapons. (1 RR at 42).
Defense counsel called Bill Bohneblust to testify. He is also a Bexar County
probation officer. (1 RR at 45). Bohneblust supervised Appellant "for about a
year" and had "no trouble" with him. (1 RR at 45). He supervised Appellant in
2013 and 2014.(1 RRat49).
The revocation hearing resumed the next day. (2 RR at 1). Appellant pleaded
"true with an explanation" to the allegation that he violated condition number 2 by
failing to submit to drug testing on January 16, 2015. (2 RR at 4). He entered the
same plea to the allegations that he violated condition number 6-C by possessing
the pipe and violated condition number 11 by possessing the knife. (2 RR at 4).
Appellant blamed transportation problems for his failure to submit to the drug test
on January 16, 2015. (2 RR at 5). He said the pipe was not his, but admitted that he
owned the knife that was found in his apartment. (2 RR at 5-6).
Defense counsel asked the trial court to continue Appellant's probation. (2
RR at 8-9). The prosecutor reminded the trial court of Appellant's many prior
.- ■ u ■.