Demarcus Jerrau McClain Johnson A/K/A Demarcus Jerro McClainJohnson v. State ( 2014 )

Menu:

                         COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-13-00020-CR
DEMARCUS JERRAU MCCLAIN                                             APPELLANT
JOHNSON A/K/A DEMARCUS
JERRO MCCLAINJOHNSON
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS                                                        STATE
----------
FROM THE 372ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
----------
Appellant Demarcus Jerrau McClain Johnson a/k/a Demarcus Jerro
McClainJohnson pled guilty to forgery by possession of a check with intent to
pass, a state jail felony. 2 He also signed a judicial confession. The trial court
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2
See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 32.21(a)–(b), (d) (West 2011).
placed Appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for three years
and imposed a $300 fine. Less than a year later, the State filed its second
petition to proceed to adjudication, alleging three violations of the community
supervision condition that he report monthly. The State later amended its second
petition to add an allegation that Appellant had violated the condition of
community supervision that he commit no offense. Appellant pled true to the
allegations.   After a hearing, the trial court adjudicated Appellant’s guilt and
sentenced him to one year’s confinement in a state jail facility, awarding credit for
time served.
Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to
withdraw as counsel from this case and a brief in support of that motion. In the
brief, counsel avers that, in his professional opinion, this appeal is frivolous.
Counsel’s brief and motion meet the requirements of Anders v. California 3 by
presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are
no arguable grounds for relief. 4 This court afforded Appellant the opportunity to
file a pro se response to the Anders brief, but he did not do so. The State
likewise did not file a brief.
3

386 U.S. 738

87 S. Ct. 1396

(1967).
4
See Stafford v. State,

813 S.W.2d 503

, 510–11 & n.3 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991).
2
Once an appellant’s court-appointed counsel files a motion to withdraw on
the ground that an appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders, we
are obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record to see if
there is any arguable ground that may be raised on his behalf. 5 Only then may
we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 6
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in
the record that might arguably support the appeal. 7 Consequently, we grant the
motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: DAUPHINOT, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GARDNER, J.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: February 20, 2014
5
See

id. at 511.