Willie Damone Fields v. State
This text of Willie Damone Fields v. State (Willie Damone Fields 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.
Opinion
i i i i i i
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-07-00819-CR
Willie Damone FIELDS, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006-CR-9564 Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Justice
Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice Catherine Stone, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 15, 2008
AFFIRMED
Willie Fields pleaded nolo contendere to the offense of possession of cocaine, and was placed
on six years deferred adjudication probation for the offense. The State subsequently filed a motion
to revoke Fields’s probation and proceed to final adjudication, alleging Fields had violated the terms
of his probation by failing to perform his community service hours and abide by his 10:00 p.m. to
6:00 a.m. curfew. After a hearing on the State’s motion, the trial court adjudicated Fields guilty and
sentenced him to six years imprisonment and fined him $1,500. We affirm. 04-07-00819-CR
Fields’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the
record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Counsel concludes that the
appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel provided Fields with a copy of the brief and informed
him of his right to review the record and file his own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85-
86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Fields did not file a pro se brief.
After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and
without merit. The judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed. Furthermore, we grant appellate
counsel’s motion to withdraw. Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.
No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Fields wish to seek further review of this case by
the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Fields must either retain an attorney to file a petition for
discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary
review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion
for rehearing that was overruled by this court. See TEX . R. APP . P. 68.2. Any petition for
discretionary review must be filed with this court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court
of Criminal Appeals. See TEX . R. APP . P. 68.3, 68.7. Any petition for discretionary review should
comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX . R.
APP . P. 68.4.
Catherine Stone, Justice
Do Not Publish
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Willie Damone Fields v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-damone-fields-v-state-texapp-2008.