Juan Columbus Miles, Jr. v. State ( 2015 )

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-13-00377-CR
JUAN COLUMBUS MILES, JR. APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 1249446D
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellant Juan Columbus Miles, Jr. entered a plea of guilty on May 29,
2012, to assault on a family member with a prior conviction. The trial court
placed Miles on deferred adjudication community supervision for five years.
Later, on July 8, 2013, the State petitioned the trial court to proceed to
adjudication. At the revocation hearing, Miles entered open pleas of true to four
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
of the State’s allegations. After hearing Miles’s testimony, the trial court
adjudicated Miles guilty of assault on a family member with a prior conviction and
sentenced him to seven years’ incarceration. This appeal followed.
Miles’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel avers that in his professional
opinion, the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion meet the
requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of
the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. See 386
U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). This court informed Harris that he may file a
pro se brief, but he did not do so. The State did not submit a brief as well.
Once an appellant’s court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on
the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this
court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State,
904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may
we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 82–
83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in
the record that might arguably support the appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178
S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d
2
684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
/s/ Bill Meier
BILL MEIER
JUSTICE
PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MEIER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: July 9, 2015
3