eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2005-02

Harrison James Batiste III v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:

  • Opinion issued February 3, 2005














    In The

    Court of Appeals

    For The  

    First District of Texas

    ____________


    NO. 01-04-00774-CR

    ____________


    HARRISON BATISTE, III, Appellant  


    V.


    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




    On Appeal from the 25th District Court

    Colorado County, Texas

    Trial Court Cause No. CR03-51



     

    MEMORANDUM OPINION  

                   Appellant, Harrison Batiste, III, pleaded no contest to the offense of assault on a public servant. In accordance with a plea bargain agreement, the trial court deferred adjudication, placed on community supervision for five years, and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate guilt. Appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the State’s motion. The trial court assessed punishment at confinement for 10 years. We affirm.

                   Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State, 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

                   Counsel represents that he served a copy of the brief on appellant. Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the record, and agree that the appeal is without merit.

                   We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

                   We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Stephens v. State, 35 S.W.3d 770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

    PER CURIAM

    Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Jennings, and Alcala.

    Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).