Natividad Villa v. State ( 2006 )

NO. 07-06-0346-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
DECEMBER 5, 2006
______________________________
NATIVIDAD VILLA,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE 69TH DISTRICT COURT OF MOORE COUNTY;
NO. 3422; HON. RON ENNS, PRESIDING
_______________________________
Memorandum Opinion
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Natividad Villa (appellant) appeals from an order adjudicating him guilty and ordering
that he serve two years in prison. He had previously pled guilty to aggravated perjury
without a recommendation as to punishment. His appellate counsel moved to withdraw
and filed an Anders1 brief in conjunction with that motion. In the brief, he represents that,
after conducting a diligent search, he found no meritorious issues warranting appeal.
1
An ders v. C alifornia, 386 U.S. 738, 744 -45, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed .2d 493 (1967 ).
Along with his brief, appellate counsel sent appellant a letter informing him of his
conclusions and his right to file a pro se response or brief. We too informed appellant, by
letter, of his right to appear via a pro se response or brief no later than November 30, 2006.
To date, no response has been filed.
In compliance with the principles enunciated in Anders, appellate counsel illustrated
why the appeal was meritless. Appellant pled true to the allegation that he had committed
a new offense. A plea of true standing alone supports a decision to revoke probation or
adjudicate guilt. Cole v. State, 578 S.W.2d 127, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). We have
also conducted our own review of the record, pursuant to Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d
503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), to assess the accuracy of appellate counsel’s conclusions and
to uncover any error. That review failed to reveal any error.
Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
2