Joseph Lynn Lucas v. State ( 2012 )

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00380-CR
JOSEPH LYNN LUCAS APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
Appellant Joseph Lynn Lucas pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain to
driving while intoxicated–felony repetition. The trial court sentenced Lucas to ten
years’ confinement, but suspended imposition of the sentence and placed Lucas
on community supervision for ten years. The State subsequently filed a petition
to revoke Lucas’s probated sentence, alleging that he had violated several terms
and conditions of his community supervision. Lucas pleaded true to each of the
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
State’s allegations, and the trial court revoked Lucas’s community supervision
and sentenced him to ten years’ confinement.
Lucas’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. In the brief, counsel avers that
in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s brief and motion
meet the requirements of Anders v. California2 by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for
relief. See Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922–23 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth
1995, no pet.). Lucas filed a pro se response to the Anders brief. The State did
not file a brief.
Once an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on
the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we
are obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record to see if
there is any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf. See Stafford v.
State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 923.
Only then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and Lucas’s
response. We agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without
merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See
2
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).
2
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Consequently,
we grant the motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
BILL MEIER
JUSTICE
PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and MEIER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: June 21, 2012
3