Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Vance Michael Stubbs v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 13-08-00702-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; August 20, 2009; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Vance Michael Stubbs was indicted for assault on a public servant and subsequently pleaded guilty. The trial court sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment, imposed a fine, suspended the sentence, and placed him on ten years of community supervision. Following violations of the terms of supervision, the State moved to revoke, and the trial court found Stubbs in violation, reinstating the original sentence. His appellate counsel filed an Anders brief, stating that no arguable grounds for appeal were found. The brief included a thorough examination of the record and relevant legal authority, confirming the absence of errors in the trial court's judgment. Stubbs was informed of his right to file a pro se response but did not do so within the allotted time. Upon independent review of the case, the court found no grounds to support an appeal, affirming the trial court’s judgment. The appellate attorney's motion to withdraw due to the frivolous nature of the appeal was granted. Counsel is mandated to send a copy of the Court's opinion and judgment to the appellant within five days and inform the appellant about the right to file a petition for discretionary review. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals specifies that a pro se response does not need to adhere strictly to appellate procedure rules, as long as it identifies the issues the indigent appellant wishes the court to consider. No substitute counsel will be appointed, and the appellant must either retain an attorney or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. This petition must be submitted within thirty days following this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing. It should be filed with this Court, which will then forward it to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, adhering to the requirements set forth in Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The memorandum opinion was delivered and filed on August 20, 2009.