Everett Earl Robinson v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Everett Earl Robinson v. State

DecidedNovember 12, 1998

Docket04-98-00229-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Everett Earl Robinson v. State (Everett Earl Robinson 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

Everett Earl Robinson v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

No. 04-98-00229-CR

Everett Earl ROBINSON, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 94-CR-4895 Honorable James E. Barlow, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 12, 1998

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

On November 23, 1994, pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Everett Earl Robinson pled guilty to burglary of a habitation. In accordance with the recommendation in the agreement, the trial court sentenced Robinson to five years imprisonment and a $1,000 fine, suspended the sentence, and placed Robinson on community supervision for five years. On February 17, 1998, Robinson pled true to six of eight allegations in the State's first amended motion to revoke probation. The trial court found Robinson violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision and sentenced him to five years incarceration in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division. Robinson perfected this appeal.

Robinson's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief in which he raises no arguable points of error and concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel states Robinson was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw. Robinson was informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief if he wished. Robinson has not done so.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant the motion to withdraw filed by Robinson's counsel. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, pet. ref'd); Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

Sarah B. Duncan

DO NOT PUBLISH

Return to
4th Court of Appeals Opinions

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

No. 04-98-00229-CR

Everett Earl ROBINSON, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 94-CR-4895 Honorable James E. Barlow, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 12, 1998

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

On November 23, 1994, pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Everett Earl Robinson pled guilty to burglary of a habitation. In accordance with the recommendation in the agreement, the trial court sentenced Robinson to five years imprisonment and a $1,000 fine, suspended the sentence, and placed Robinson on community supervision for five years. On February 17, 1998, Robinson pled true to six of eight allegations in the State's first amended motion to revoke probation. The trial court found Robinson violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision and sentenced him to five years incarceration in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division. Robinson perfected this appeal.

Robinson's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a brief in which he raises no arguable points of error and concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Counsel states Robinson was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw. Robinson was informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief if he wished. Robinson has not done so.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant the motion to withdraw filed by Robinson's counsel. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, pet. ref'd); Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.

Sarah B. Duncan

DO NOT PUBLISH

Return to
4th Court of Appeals Opinions

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Everett Earl Robinson v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/everett-earl-robinson-v-state-texapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack