PAUL TYRELLE GATLIN v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas.

PAUL TYRELLE GATLIN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

No. 05–10–01596–CR

Decided: January 17, 2012

Before Justices Moseley, FitzGerald, and Richter

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice Moseley

Paul Tyrelle Gatlin appeals from the adjudication of his guilt for possession of less than one gram of cocaine.   See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(a), (b) (West 2010).   On appeal, appellant's attorney filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.   The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).   The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance.   See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1978).   Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant.   We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response.   After reviewing the record, we conclude there is at least one arguable issue.   See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex.Crim.App.2005).

The record shows appellant was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for a four-year period on August 5, 2003.   See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 5(a) (West 2011).   Both a capias for appellant's arrest and a motion to adjudicate were issued on November 19, 2003.   See id. § 21(e).   The capias recites appellant's arrest was September 19, 21010, almost seven years after the capias was issued.   Appellant was adjudicated guilty of the offense on October 21, 2010, more than three years after the supervision period ended.   Thus, we conclude an arguable issue exists as to the seven-year gap between the time the capias was issued and appellant's arrest, and the expiration of the community service period during the seven-year gap.   See id. § 5(c).

We grant appellate counsel's motion to withdraw.   See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App.1991).   We remand the appeal to the trial court.   We order the trial court to appoint new appellate counsel to represent appellant, investigate the record, and file a brief on the merits.   See id.   Appellate counsel should investigate the record and file a brief that addresses the issue noted above and any other grounds that might arguably support the appeal.   See id.   We further order the trial court to inform this Court in writing of the identity of appellate counsel and the date counsel is appointed.

We remove the appeal from the submission docket.   We abate the appeal to allow the trial court to comply with this order.

JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE

Copied to clipboard