Jason David Winfree v. State ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                       In The
    Court of Appeals
    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
    ____________________
    NO. 09-13-00540-CR
    ____________________
    JASON DAVID WINFREE, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    _______________________________________________________            ______________
    On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
    Jefferson County, Texas
    Trial Cause No. 10-10484
    ________________________________________________________             _____________
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Jason David Winfree pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to the third-
    degree felony offense of indecency with a child, enhanced by a prior felony
    conviction. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. §§ 21.11(a)(2) (West 2011); 12.42(a) (West
    Supp. 2013). The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt, assessed a fine of $500,
    and placed Winfree on unadjudicated community supervision for ten years. The
    State filed a motion to revoke community supervision. Winfree pleaded “true” to
    violations of his supervision. Finding Winfree violated the terms of his community
    1
    supervision, the trial court revoked Winfree’s supervision, adjudicated his guilt,
    and sentenced him to twenty years in prison.
    Winfree’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional
    evaluation of the record and concludes there are no arguable points of error. See
    Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967); High v. State, 
    573 S.W.2d 807
    (Tex.
    Crim. App. 1978). We granted an extension of time for Winfree to file a pro se
    response. We received no response from Winfree.
    We have independently reviewed the clerk’s record and reporter’s record to
    determine whether there are arguable grounds which might support an appeal. See
    Bledsoe v. State, 
    178 S.W.3d 824
    , 826-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); Stafford v.
    State, 
    813 S.W.2d 503
    , 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We have found none.
    Therefore, it is unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief
    Winfree’s appeal. See 
    Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 826-28
    ; compare 
    Stafford, 813 S.W.2d at 511
    .
    We affirm the trial court’s judgment.
    AFFIRMED.
    _________________________
    LEANNE JOHNSON
    Justice
    Submitted on May 15, 2014
    Opinion Delivered June 11, 2014
    Do Not Publish
    Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-13-00540-CR

Filed Date: 6/11/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/16/2015