Lucinda Michelle Borres v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: October 16, 2008
• Docket: 14-08-00325-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 16, 2008

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 16, 2008.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-08-00325-CR

LUCINDA MICHELLE BORRES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 80118

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the offense of theft.  On February 28, 2000, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for two years in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, but suspended the sentence and placed appellant on community supervision for five years and assessed a $750 fine.  Appellant=s community supervision was subsequently extended.  On March 7, 2008, after a plea of true to the first count in the State=s motion to revoke, the trial court revoked appellant=s community supervision and sentenced her to confinement for two years in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.

Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes 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 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-12 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel=s brief was delivered to appellant.  Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response.  See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).  As of this date, more than sixty days has elapsed and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit.  See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).  Further, we find no reversible error in the record.  A discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed October 16, 2008.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Guzman and Brown. 

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).