Anthony Recardo Williams, Jr. v. State
This text of Anthony Recardo Williams, Jr. v. State (Anthony Recardo Williams, Jr. 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.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00544-CR
ANTHONY RECARDO WILLIAMS, APPELLANT JR.
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 4 OF TARRANT COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
Pursuant to a plea bargain, Appellant Anthony Recardo Williams, Jr.
pleaded guilty to burglary of a habitation. See Tex. Penal Code Ann.
§ 30.02(c)(2) (West 2011). In accordance with the terms of the plea bargain, the
trial court placed him on six years= deferred adjudication community supervision
and sentenced him to pay a $600 fine. The State subsequently filed a petition to
1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. proceed to adjudication, alleging that Williams had violated four conditions of his
community supervision. Williams pleaded Atrue@ to three of the violations alleged
in the State’s petition. The trial court found that three paragraphs of the petition
were true, adjudicated Williams guilty, and sentenced him to five years=
confinement. This appeal followed.
Williams’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet
the requirements of Anders v. California2 by presenting a professional evaluation
of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. This
court afforded Williams the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did
not do so.
As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the
record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is
frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991);
Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only
then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We agree with
counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit; we find nothing in
the record that arguably might support an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178
2 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).
2 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s
motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: WALKER, GARDNER, and MCCOY, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: October 4, 2012
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Anthony Recardo Williams, Jr. v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anthony-recardo-williams-jr-v-state-texapp-2012.