eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2002-07

Wade Louis Owens v. State ( 2002 )


Menu:

  •   

    In The



    Court of Appeals



    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



    ____________________



    NO. 09-01-392 CR

    ____________________



    WADE LOUIS OWENS, Appellant



    V.



    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



    On Appeal from the Criminal District Court

    Jefferson County, Texas

    Trial Cause No. 72946



    MEMORANDUM OPINION  

    Wade Louis Owens pleaded guilty to the second degree felony offense of burglary of a habitation. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(1),(c)(2) (Vernon Supp. 2002). The trial court convicted Owens, assessing a sentence of five years of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, and a $1,000 fine, but suspended imposition of the sentence. The trial court placed Owens on community supervision for five years, beginning February 24, 1997. Owens later pleaded "true" to an alleged violation of the community supervision order, and the trial court ordered Owens to serve his sentence.   

    Appellate counsel filed a brief that concludes no arguable error is presented in this appeal. 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 March 21, 2002, Owens was given an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant. Because the appeal involves the application of well-settled principles of law, we deliver this memorandum opinion. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.1.  

    Issues relating to the conviction may be raised only in an appeal taken when community supervision is originally imposed. See Whetstone v. State, 786 S.W.2d 361, 363 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990), overruled in part on other grounds by Gollihar v. State, 46 S.W.3d 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001). In the appeal of an order revoking community supervision, the only question presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking the appellant's community supervision. Jackson v. State, 645 S.W.2d 303, 305 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983). Owens admitted to violating the conditions of continued community supervision.

    We have reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The judgment is affirmed.  

    AFFIRMED.

    PER CURIAM





      Submitted on June 26, 2002

    Opinion Delivered July 10, 2002

    Do Not Publish



    Before Walker, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.