DocketNumber: 09-13-00246-CR
Filed Date: 12/11/2013
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/16/2015
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-13-00246-CR ____________________ BRANDON LEE KILPATRICK, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ ______________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 11-11680 ____________________________________________ ____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Brandon Lee Kilpatrick pleaded guilty to felony driving while intoxicated. The trial court found Kilpatrick guilty, suspended imposition of sentence, and placed Kilpatrick on community supervision for ten years. The State later filed a motion to revoke Kilpatrick’s community supervision. Kilpatrick pleaded “true” to violating five conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Kilpatrick violated the 1 conditions of his community supervision, revoked Kilpatrick’s community supervision, and sentenced Kilpatrick to ten years in prison. Kilpatrick’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes Kilpatrick’s appeal is frivolous. 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 Kilpatrick to file a pro se brief, but we received no response from Kilpatrick. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. 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. 1 AFFIRMED. ________________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on November 27, 2013 Opinion Delivered December 11, 2013 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 1 Kilpatrick may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2