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.
AARON TODD DAVIS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A grand jury indicted Aaron Todd Davis for robbery, a second degree felony. See Tex. Penal Code § 29.02 (West 2011). Davis pleaded guilty to the lesser-included offense of theft, and on July 1, 2014, the trial court deferred adjudication and placed Davis on community supervision for a period of five years. On December 5, 2014, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging that Davis had violated five conditions of his community supervision. The State subsequently amended its motion to adjudicate several times, adding additional allegations, and a hearing was held on the State's motion on August 17, 2016. Davis pleaded “not true” to the motion. After hearing evidence, the trial court found that Davis had violated six conditions of his community supervision. The court adjudicated Davis guilty and sentenced him to two years in state jail. Davis timely filed a notice of appeal.
Davis's appellate counsel subsequently filed a brief that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). On October 20, 2016, this Court notified Davis that he could file a pro se brief on or before December 19, 2016. We have received no additional brief from him.
We have independently examined the entire appellate record in this matter, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgment.1
AFFIRMED.
FOOTNOTES
1. Davis may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
CHARLES KREGER Justice
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: NO. 09-16-00305-CR
Decided: September 20, 2017
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas, Beaumont.
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)