Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-12-00445-CR

Robert KNOWER,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2011CR10128

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 11, 2013

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

In March 2012, appellant Robert Knower pleaded nolo contendere to the offense of assault 

on a family member, enhanced by a prior family violence assault. The trial court sentenced 

Knower to four years confinement and assessed a $1,500.00 fine. However, the trial court 

suspended the entire sentence and placed Knower on community supervision for a period of five 

years. Knower did not appeal from that judgment. 
04-12-00445-CR

In July 2012, the State filed a motion to revoke Knower’s community supervision, alleging 

he violated several terms of his community supervision. Knower pled true to violating one of the 

conditions alleged by the State. Thereafter, the trial court revoked Knower’s community 

supervision and ordered Knower to serve a sentence of three years and pay a $1,500.00 fine. 

Knower perfected this appeal. 

Knower’s court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in 

which he raises no arguable points of error and concludes 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). Knower was provided with a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was 

informed of his right to review the record and file his own brief. Knower did not file a brief. 

After reviewing the record and counsel’s brief, we find no reversible error and agree with 

counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Knower’s counsel and affirm the 

trial court’s judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 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.). 

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Knower wish to seek further review of 

this case in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he 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 after either the day our judgment is rendered 

or the day the last timely motion for rehearing or timely motion for en banc reconsideration is 

overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be 

filed with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for 

- 2 -
04-12-00445-CR

discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Do Not Publish

- 3 -