Anthony Lashone Fuller v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 16, 2007
Docket09-06-00437-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Anthony Lashone Fuller v. State (Anthony Lashone Fuller v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anthony Lashone Fuller v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________



NO. 09-06-437 CR



ANTHONY LASHONE FULLER, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 90376



MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant Anthony Lashone Fuller pled guilty to the offense of assault on a public servant. The trial court found that the evidence substantiated Fuller's guilt, but deferred further proceedings, placed Fuller on community supervision for ten years, and imposed a fine in the amount of $1500. On January 17, 2006, the State filed a motion to revoke Fuller's unadjudicated community supervision. At the hearing on the motion to revoke, Fuller pled "true" to violating two of the conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found counts one and three true, revoked Fuller's unadjudicated community supervision, found him guilty of assault on a public servant, and sentenced Fuller to ten years of confinement. Fuller filed this appeal, in which he asserts he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the revocation hearing. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits appeals of revocation of deferred adjudication. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.12, § 5(b) (Vernon 2006). Therefore, on direct appeal, Fuller cannot appeal the trial court's decision to proceed with adjudicating guilt. See Phynes v. State, 828 S.W.2d 1, 2 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Olowosuko v. State, 826 S.W.2d 940, 942 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). Complaints concerning the representation provided by counsel at a revocation hearing cannot be raised on direct appeal. Lowe v. State, 997 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1999, no pet.); see also Connolly v. State, 983 S.W.2d 738, 741 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to address Fuller's issue. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.



STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice



Submitted on May 3, 2007

Opinion Delivered May 16, 2007

Do Not Publish



Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Connolly v. State
983 S.W.2d 738 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Phynes v. State
828 S.W.2d 1 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Lowe v. State
997 S.W.2d 670 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Olowosuko v. State
826 S.W.2d 940 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Anthony Lashone Fuller v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-lashone-fuller-v-state-texapp-2007.