Donald Bradley Prince v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 23, 2013
Docket08-11-00215-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Donald Bradley Prince v. State (Donald Bradley Prince 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
Donald Bradley Prince v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

                                                           COURT OF APPEALS

                                                   EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                              EL PASO, TEXAS

DONALD BRADLEY PRINCE,

                                    Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                    Appellees.

'

                  No. 08-11-00215-CR

                         Appeal from

396th District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC # 1192824D)

                                                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

Donald Bradley Prince appeals his conviction of aggravated assault against a public servant.  Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered an open plea of guilty to the trial court.  The court found Appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for a term of thirty-five years.  We affirm. 

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U .S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by advancing contentions which counsel says might arguably support the appeal.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974); Pena v. State, 932 S.W.2d 31 (Tex.App.--El Paso 1995, no pet.).  Counsel delivered a copy of his brief to Appellant and advised Appellant of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.

The Court has carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief in its entirety, and agrees that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably warrant an appeal.  The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

January 23, 2013                                 _______________________________________________

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Antcliff, JJ.

Antcliff, J., not participating

(Do Not Publish)

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)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Pena v. State
932 S.W.2d 31 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)
Currie v. State
516 S.W.2d 684 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)
O'Bryan v. Chandler
388 U.S. 904 (Supreme Court, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Donald Bradley Prince v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donald-bradley-prince-v-state-texapp-2013.