Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves an appeal by the appellant, who was initially indicted for felony theft and placed on deferred community supervision after pleading guilty. His supervision was modified and extended multiple times before being revoked due to violations, leading to a sentence of twenty months in state jail. The appellant's counsel, appointed for the purpose of the appeal, submitted an Anders brief, indicating that after a thorough review of the records, including the sufficiency of the indictment and any adverse pretrial rulings, no appealable issues were identified. The appellant had admitted to certain violations of his community supervision, and the revocation hearing confirmed those admissions voluntarily. The appeal questioned the effectiveness of the appellant's defense counsel during the revocation hearing and the possibility of a reversible error by the trial court regarding the sentencing. However, the appellate counsel found no reversible errors or ineffective assistance of counsel, as the appellant was allowed to present his testimony and received written admonishments per Texas procedural requirements. Consequently, the counsel has requested to withdraw, complying with the standards of Anders v. California and Kelly v. State, and has left the option open for the appellant to submit further briefs if desired.
Legal Issues Addressed
Anders Brief and Motion to Withdrawsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief, indicating no appealable issues were found, and requested to withdraw from the case.
Reasoning: Coretta T. Graham represents Anderson on appeal, having filed the brief under Anders v. California, indicating that after reviewing the case, she found no appealable issues.
Compliance with Anders and Kelly Standardssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate counsel adhered to the requirements of Anders v. California and Kelly v. State, confirming no appealable issues were present, thus justifying the request for withdrawal.
Reasoning: In conclusion, following the standards set by Anders v. California and Kelly v. State, the counsel determined that no appealable issues exist and requested to withdraw from the case.
Deferred Community Supervision and Revocationsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant was placed on deferred community supervision, which was later revoked due to violations, resulting in a sentence of imprisonment.
Reasoning: Anderson was initially indicted for Felony Theft on August 6, 2009, and after pleading guilty on September 21, 2009, he was placed on deferred community supervision for two years.
Ineffective Assistance of Counselsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was examined but found unsupported as the attorney's performance during the revocation hearing did not demonstrate harmful errors.
Reasoning: The appeal raises two questions: the effectiveness of defense counsel during Anderson's revocation hearing and the possibility of reversible error by the trial court regarding Anderson’s sentence.