Christopher Davontae Bennett v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
• Decided: April 24, 2026
• Docket: 03-25-00517-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00517-CR

Christopher Davontae Bennett, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY NO. FR75556, THE HONORABLE DEBBIE GARRETT, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Christopher Devontae Bennett entered a guilty plea to sexual assault of a child.

The trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed Bennett on community supervision for eight

years. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.011(a)(2)A). The State subsequently moved to adjudicate

Bennett’s guilt, alleging he violated terms of the community supervision order. Bennett pled true

to several alleged violations, and the trial court found those alleged violations true, adjudicated

Bennett’s guilt, and sentenced him to confinement for eighteen years in the Institutional Division

of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Bennett filed a timely notice of appeal.

Bennett’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw supported by an

Anders brief contending that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Bennett’s court-appointed attorney’s brief meets the requirements

of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id.; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs

serve purpose of “assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the

required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous”). Bennett’s counsel has

represented to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Bennett; advised

Bennett of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary

review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court. He also provided to Bennett a

Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record lacking only Bennett’s signature and the date

and provided the mailing address for this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Bennett has not filed a pro se brief nor a motion for extension of time

to file a brief.

We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might

arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We

agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw and affirm the trial court’s order.

__________________________________________ Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Theofanis

Affirmed

Filed: April 24, 2026

Do Not Publish