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.
Charles Leo Anderson III v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 13-15-00002-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; August 31, 2015; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Charles Leo Anderson III, the appellant, pleaded guilty to indecency with a child in 2013 and was placed on eight years of deferred adjudication community supervision. In October 2014, the State filed a motion to revoke his supervision due to multiple violations, including failure to report and submit to drug testing. During the December 2014 revocation hearing, Anderson admitted to the violations, leading the trial court to revoke his supervision, adjudicate him guilty, and sentence him to twenty years in prison. Appellant's counsel submitted an Anders brief, indicating no non-frivolous issues for appeal after a thorough review of the case. The brief complied with legal standards by referencing the record and discussing the absence of reversible errors. Counsel notified Anderson of their findings and his rights, but he did not file a pro se response. The Court of Appeals conducted an independent review of the record and the counsel's brief, concluding that there were no reversible errors. Ultimately, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment and granted the motion for counsel to withdraw. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has clarified that a pro se response from an indigent appellant does not need to conform to appellate procedure rules but should outline the issues the appellant believes merit consideration. If an attorney determines the appeal is frivolous, they are required to withdraw and must file a motion to withdraw supported by a brief indicating the frivolity of the appeal. The court has granted the attorney's motion to withdraw and instructed that a copy of the opinion and judgment be sent to the appellant, informing him of his right to file a petition for discretionary review within five days. No new counsel will be appointed. For further review, the appellant must either hire an attorney or file a pro se petition for discretionary review within thirty days from the date of the opinion or the last motion for rehearing. Any such petition must be filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and adhere to the procedural requirements outlined in the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.