Opinion

Ernest Brown, Jr. v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Mar 30, 2006
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 35.2%

The opinion

Opinion issued March 30, 2006

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

____________

NO. 01-05-00800-CR

____________

ERNEST BROWN, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 842547

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Ernest Brown, Jr., pleaded guilty to the felony offense of

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and, in accordance with his plea bargain

agreement with the State, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed

appellant on community supervision for a period of seven years. Subsequently, the

State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt alleging that appellant violated the terms and

conditions of his community supervision. Appellant pleaded not true to allegations

that he violated his the terms and condition of his probation by committing the

offense of indecency with a child and, to the allegation that he failed to report to his

community supervision officer as ordered by the court for the month of February

2002. Appellant pleaded true to the allegation that he failed to perform community

service restitution at the court-ordered rate. After a hearing on the motion to

adjudicate, the trial court found all three allegations in the motion to adjudicate to be

true and adjudicated appellant guilty of the felony offense of aggravated assault. The

trial court then sentenced appellant to confinement for twenty years. We affirm.

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw as

counsel and a brief concluding that this appeal is without merit. Counsel’s brief

meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 , 87 S. Ct. 1396,

1400 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record that demonstrates

the lack of arguable grounds of error. See High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1978); Moore v. State , 845 S.W.2d 352, 353 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st

Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d).

Counsel represents that he has served a copy of the brief on appellant.

Counsel also advised appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file

a pro se brief. See Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

More than 30 days have passed, and appellant has not filed a pro se brief. We have

carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no reversible error in the

record, and agree that the appeal is without merit. We therefore affirm the judgment

of the trial court.

We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

See Stephens v. State , 35 S.W.3d

770, 771 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, no pet.).

Any pending motions are denied as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Jennings and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.