Cornelius E Anderson v. State ( 2020 )

Opinion issued April 30, 2020
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-19-00220-CR
———————————
CORNELIUS E. ANDERSON, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 179th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1562518
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Cornelius E. Anderson, pleaded guilty, with an agreed
recommendation from the State of six years deferred adjudication, to the offense of
aggravated assault of a family member with a deadly weapon, a second-degree
felony. See TEX. PENAL CODE § 22.02. The trial court found sufficient evidence to
find appellant guilty, but deferred making any finding regarding appellant’s guilt
and placed appellant on community supervision for a period of six years. See TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 42A.101. The State then filed a motion to adjudicate
appellant’s guilt, alleging that appellant failed to report to his probation officer as
directed on November 30, 2017 and February 6, 2018. See id. art. 42A.108. The
State filed a supplemental motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging that appellant
assaulted a public servant. Appellant pleaded not true to assault of a public servant,
but pleaded true that he did not report. After a hearing, the trial court found that
appellant committed a violation of his community supervision, adjudicated appellant
guilty, and sentenced appellant to eight years in prison. See id.; TEX. PENAL CODE
§ 12.33. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw, along
with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal is
without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a professional
evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record and legal
authority. 386 U.S. at 744; see also High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has thoroughly reviewed the record and he is
unable to advance any grounds of error that warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S.
2
at 744; Mitchell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.]
2006, no pet.). Appellant filed a response.
We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we
conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds
for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 (emphasizing
that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full examination of
proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763,
767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine whether arguable
grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing court determines
whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We note that an
appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds for appeal by
filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw.1 Attorney Sharon E. Slopis must immediately send appellant the required
notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P.
6.5(c).
1
Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal
and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of
Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).
3
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Kelly and Goodman.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4