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.
Vernon Hemphill v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 13-09-00672-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; January 26, 2011; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Vernon Hemphill was charged in two appellate cases: 13-09-00672-CR for unlawful possession of less than one gram of a controlled substance, and 13-09-00673-CR for unlawful possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. Hemphill pleaded guilty to the charges, receiving a two-year sentence in the first case and a plea to a lesser-included charge in the second, resulting in a seven-year sentence, both of which were suspended in favor of community supervision for four years. Subsequently, the State filed motions to revoke his community supervision due to multiple violations, to which Hemphill pleaded "true." The trial court revoked his supervision, imposing the original sentences to run concurrently and ordering him to pay court costs. Hemphill filed motions for new trial that were overruled by operation of law, leading to his appeals. His appellate counsel submitted Anders briefs, indicating there were no arguable grounds for reversal after a thorough review of the record. The counsel's briefs complied with legal standards, provided necessary references, and explained the lack of errors in the trial court's judgments. Hemphill was informed of his rights regarding the appeals, including the opportunity to respond pro se. The court ultimately affirmed the lower court’s decisions. An independent review was conducted following the submission of an Anders brief regarding Hemphill's cases, confirming no grounds for appeal were found. Hemphill did not file a pro se response despite sufficient time having passed. The court affirmed the trial court's judgments, satisfying Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 47.1. Hemphill's attorney requested permission to withdraw, citing the appeal as frivolous, which was granted. The attorney must inform Hemphill of his right to file petitions for discretionary review within five days. The State's motions to revoke Hemphill's community supervision were based on his failure to complete a substance abuse program and positive drug tests. Hemphill's appellate counsel sought permission to appeal in two cases, which was granted. No substitute counsel will be appointed. Hemphill can either hire an attorney or file pro se petitions for discretionary review within thirty days, complying with specific procedural rules.