Roland Charles Jr. v. State ( 2009 )

Opinion issued April 23, 2009

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-08-00298-CR

____________

ROLAND CHARLES, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1010171

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Roland Charles, Jr., without an agreed punishment recommendation from the State, pleaded guilty to the second degree felony offense of possession of a controlled substance. The trial court admonished appellant about the consequences of entering his plea of guilty, accepted his plea of guilty, deferred adjudication of guilt, placed him on community supervision for ten years, assessed a $500 fine, and ordered him, along with other terms and conditions of probation, to perform 150 hours of community service.

Subsequently, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt that after a hearing was granted by the trial court on April 10, 2008. Based on newly discovered evidence, appellant's attorney filed a motion for new trial. Following a motion for new trial hearing, the court granted the motion on April 29, 2008. Appellant then filed a motion to recuse the trial court judge which was denied.

The State filed an amended motion to adjudicate guilt on May 28, 2008. On July 10, 2008, appellant pleaded true to the allegations in the State's amended motion to adjudicate. Contemporaneously with his plea of true, appellant, appellant's counsel, and the State signed a stipulation of evidence, which included a judicial confession and waiver of constitutional rights. In this stipulation, appellant stated that: On the 15th day of May, 2006, I violated the terms and conditions of said probation in that I tested positive for marihuana, plus additional violations as alleged in the motion to adjudicate.

After a hearing on the State's motion, the trial court found the allegations in the State's motion to be true, found appellant guilty of the original charge, and assessed his punishment at confinement for 12 years and a $500 fine. Appellant's counsel on appeal has filed a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error, that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous, and that the appeal must be dismissed or affirmed. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, (1967). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and detailing why there are no arguable grounds for reversal. Id. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 810 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel represents that she has 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. Having reviewed the record and counsel's brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit and that there is no reversible error. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel's motion to withdraw. ⁽¹⁾

Attorney Toni M. Triplett must immediately send the notice required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5(c) and file a copy of that notice with the Clerk of this Court.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes, and Higley.

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

1. Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).