Leticia Emerson v. State ( 2015 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-14-00486-CR
____________________
LETICIA EMERSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
________________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 11-13043
________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Leticia Emerson (Emerson)
pleaded guilty to the state jail felony offense of injury to a child. See Tex. Penal
Code Ann. § 22.04(a)(3),(f) (West Supp. 2014).1 The trial court found the evidence
sufficient to find Emerson guilty, but deferred further proceedings and placed
1
We cite to the current version of the statute as the subsequent amendments
do not affect the outcome of this appeal.
1
Emerson on community supervision for four years and assessed a $500 fine. The
State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Emerson’s unadjudicated community
supervision. Emerson pleaded “true” to alleged violations of the conditions of her
community supervision. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court
found that Emerson violated the conditions of her community supervision, found
Emerson guilty of injury to a child, and assessed punishment at twelve months of
confinement.
Emerson’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional
evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.
1978). On February 4, 2015, we granted an extension of time for Emerson to file a
pro se brief. We received no response from Emerson asserting any appellate issues.
We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion
that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to
order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State,
813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s
judgment. 2
2
Emerson may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
2
AFFIRMED.
_________________________
LEANNE JOHNSON
Justice
Submitted on May 11, 2015
Opinion Delivered May 27, 2015
Do Not Publish
Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
3