Bronson Williams v. State

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-19-00265-CR __________________

BRONSON WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 13-17383 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Bronson Williams pleaded

guilty to aggravated robbery. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find

Williams guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Williams on community

supervision for ten years, and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed

a motion to revoke Williams’s unadjudicated community supervision. Williams

pleaded “true” to eight violations of the terms of his community supervision. The

1 trial court found that Williams had violated the conditions of his community

supervision, found Williams guilty of aggravated robbery, and assessed punishment

at fifty years of confinement.

Williams’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.

1978). On September 10, 2019, we granted an extension of time for Williams to file

a pro se brief. We received no response from Williams. We have reviewed the

appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues

support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new

counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

AFFIRMED.

______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice

Submitted on December 17, 2019 Opinion Delivered January 8, 2020 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 1 Williams may challenge our opinion in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2