Jessica Shanece Fisher v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 29, 2015
• Docket: 01-14-00469-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued June 25, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-14-00469-CR ——————————— JESSICA SHANECE FISHER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1406727

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jessica Shanece Fisher, pleaded guilty to the state jail felony

offense of credit card abuse. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 32.31(b)(1)(A) (West

2011). In accordance with appellant’s plea-bargain agreement with the State, the

trial court found sufficient evidence to find appellant guilty, but deferred making any finding regarding appellant’s guilt and placed appellant on community

supervision for a period of three years. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12

§ 5(a) (West Supp. 2014). The State then filed a motion to adjudicate appellant’s

guilt. See id. §§ 5(b), 21(e). Appellant pleaded not true to the alleged violations of

the terms of her community supervision. The trial court found the allegations true,

adjudicated appellant guilty, and sentenced appellant to two years’ imprisonment.

See id. §§ 5(b), 21(b), 23. Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.

Appellant’s appointed counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw,

along with a brief stating that the record presents no reversible error and the appeal

is without merit and is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct.

1396 (1967). Counsel’s brief meets the Anders requirements by presenting a

professional evaluation of the record and supplying us with references to the record

and legal authority. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; see also High v.

State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Counsel indicates that he has

thoroughly reviewed the record and is unable to advance any grounds of error that

warrant reversal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at 1400; Mitchell v. State,

193 S.W.3d 153, 155 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.).

We have independently reviewed the entire record in this appeal, and we

conclude that no reversible error exists in the record, there are no arguable grounds

for review, and the appeal is frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S. Ct. at

2 1400 (emphasizing that reviewing court—and not counsel—determines, after full

examination of proceedings, whether appeal is wholly frivolous); Garner v. State,

300 S.W.3d 763, 767 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (reviewing court must determine

whether arguable grounds for review exist); Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824,

826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (same); Mitchell, 193 S.W.3d at 155 (reviewing

court determines whether arguable grounds exist by reviewing entire record). We

note that an appellant may challenge a holding that there are no arguable grounds

for appeal by filing a petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals. See Bledsoe, 178 S.W.3d at 827 & n.6.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court and grant counsel’s motion to

withdraw.1 Attorney Douglas B. Durham must immediately send appellant the

required notice and file a copy of the notice with the Clerk of this Court. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 6.5(c).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Bland, and Brown.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

1 Appointed counsel still has a duty to inform appellant of the result of this appeal and that he may, on his own, pursue discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 3