Glenda Tiffin v. State ( 2010 )

NO. 07-09-0380-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
APRIL 28, 2010
______________________________
GLENDA SUE TIFFIN,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE 64TH DISTRICT COURT OF SWISHER COUNTY;
NO. A3875-0406; HON. ROBERT W. KINKAID, JR., PRESIDING
_______________________________
Anders Opinion
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
Appellant Glenda Sue Tiffin appeals her conviction for tampering with a
governmental record, a state jail felony. Pursuant to a plea agreement, she pled guilty
to the offense, and the trial court placed her on community supervision for three years.
Subsequently, the State moved the trial court to revoke appellant’s probation. She pled
true to the alleged violations of the terms of her community supervision, and the trial
court held a hearing. Upon completion of the hearing, the trial court revoked appellant’s
probation and sentenced her to two years in a state jail facility. The trial court certified
that appellant had the right to appeal.
Appellant’s counsel has now moved to withdraw, after filing a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), representing
that he has searched the record and found no arguable grounds for reversal. The
motion and brief illustrate that appellant was informed of her right to review the
appellate record and file her own brief. So too did we inform her that any pro se
response or brief she cared to file had to be filed by April 19, 2010. To date, she has
filed no such response or brief.
In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel
discussed each phase of the case including the original plea of guilty, the revocation
hearing which included appellant entering a plea of true to the motion’s allegations and
the “propriety of the $1,000.00 sanction fine imposed on Appellant in the first revocation
proceeding.” However, counsel goes on to explain why the issues are without merit.
We have also conducted an independent review of the record to determine
whether there existed reversible error and found none. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d
503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (requiring us to conduct an independent review of the
record). A plea of true alone is sufficient to support the finding that appellant violated
her probation. Atchison v. State, 124 S.W.3d 755, 758-59 (Tex. App.–Austin 2003, pet.
ref’d). The punishment assessed was also within the range prescribed by law. TEX.
PENAL CODE ANN. §§37.10(c)(1) & 12.35(a) (Vernon Supp. 2009).
2
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of
the trial court.1
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
1
Appellant has the right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review from this opinion.
3