Rodrick Lanier Tillman v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 4, 2004
• Docket: 10-02-00269-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-02-00269-CR

Rodrick Lanier Tillman,

                                                                      Appellant

 v.

The State of Texas,

                                                                      Appellee

From the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Court # 84152

MEMORANDUM  Opinion

       Roderick Lanier Tillman was convicted of aggravated robbery.  He pled guilty under a plea agreement and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision.  Shortly thereafter, he pled true to alleged violations of the conditions of supervision and the court revoked supervision and assessed twenty years in prison.

                                                  Anders Brief

      Tillman=s counsel on appeal filed an Anders brief.  See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 1400, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967).  We now decide Awhether the case is . . . frivolous@ as claimed by counsel.  See Taulung v. State, 979 S.W.2d 854, 855 (Tex. App.CWaco 1998, no pet.).  In the brief, counsel considers issues relevant to an appeal of a proceeding where the defendant pled guilty, was placed on community supervision, pled true on a motion to revoke, and was sentenced accordingly.  Counsel's brief also contains references to the record, applicable statutes, rules, and cases, and discusses why counsel concludes that the appeal is frivolous.  See Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 691 (Tex. App.—Waco 2001, no pet.).  Counsel provided Tillman a copy of the brief and advised him of his right to file a pro se brief or other response.  See id.  Tillman has not filed a response.

We have independently reviewed the record and agree that there are no issues Awhich might arguably support an appeal.@  Id. at 692.  Because we are affirming the judgment and sentence, counsel must advise Tillman of the result of this appeal and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review.  Id. at 694; see also Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25, 27 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

                                                   Conclusion

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

BILL VANCE

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Reyna

Judgment affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed August 4, 2004

Do not publish

[CR25]