Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
RONALD SHORTY APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
Appellant Ronald Shorty pleaded guilty to sexual assault pursuant to a plea bargain agreement. On January 5, 2009, the trial court placed him on five years' deferred adjudication community supervision. The State filed a petition to proceed to adjudication on March 12, 2009, alleging that Shorty had violated two conditions of his community supervision. Shorty's court-appointed trial counsel filed a motion for competency exam, and the trial court appointed Dr. Barry Norman to conduct the exam. Dr. Norman concluded that Shorty was competent to stand trial. Shorty pleaded “true” to the allegations in the State's petition to proceed to adjudication. The State waived one allegation in its petition. The trial court found that the second allegation in the State's petition was true, adjudicated Shorty guilty, and sentenced him to nine years' confinement.
Shorty'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 averred that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous. Counsel's brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California 2 by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no reversible grounds on appeal and referencing any grounds that might arguably support the appeal. See Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922-23 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). This court afforded Shorty the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did not do so.
Once an appellant's court-appointed attorney files a motion to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, this court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App.1991); Mays, 904 S.W.2d at 922-23. 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 counsel's brief and the record. 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 Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex.Crim.App.2005). Accordingly, we grant counsel's motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court's judgment.
Tex.R.App. P. 47.2(b)
FOOTNOTES
FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.. FN1. See Tex.R.App. P. 47.4.
FN2. 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967).. FN2. 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967).
SUE WALKER JUSTICE
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: NO. 2-09-191-CR
Decided: January 14, 2010
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)