Chuck Allen Pierce v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 3, 2003
Docket09-03-00113-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Chuck Allen Pierce v. State (Chuck Allen Pierce 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
Chuck Allen Pierce v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-03-113 CR



CHUCK ALLEN PIERCE, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



On Appeal from the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 87315



MEMORANDUM OPINION (1)


Chuck Allen Pierce entered a non-negotiated guilty plea to an indictment for the State jail felony offense of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 31.07 (Vernon 2003). The trial court convicted and sentenced Pierce to seventeen months of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, State Jail Division. The trial court certified that this is not a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has the right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

Appellate counsel filed a brief that concludes no arguable error is presented in this appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On July 24, 2003, Pierce was given an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant.

As there was no plea bargain agreement, we have jurisdiction over the appeal. Jack v. State, 871 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). It appears the appellant was duly admonished. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.13 (Vernon Supp. 2004). Pierce signed a judicial confession and admitted his guilt in open court. He does not contest the voluntariness of his guilty plea.

We have reviewed the clerk's and the reporter's records, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM



Submitted on November 18, 2003

Opinion Delivered December 3, 2003

Do Not Publish

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

1.

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
Jack v. State
871 S.W.2d 741 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Chuck Allen Pierce v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chuck-allen-pierce-v-state-texapp-2003.