NO. 12-18-00293-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

STEVEN JACOB BUCK, 

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 159TH 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

ANGELINA COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Steven Jacob Buck appeals his conviction for forgery against the elderly. Appellant’s 

counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.

Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Appellant was charged by indictment with two counts of the offense of forgery against the 

elderly by making, completing, executing, or authenticating a writing, i.e., a check, with the intent 

to defraud or harm another, namely, an elderly individual sixty-five years of age or older, a third 

degree felony.1 Appellant pleaded “guilty” to the offense charged in the indictment. Appellant and 

his counsel signed various documents in connection with his guilty plea, including an agreed 

punishment recommendation and a stipulation of evidence in which Appellant swore that his 

written guilty plea constituted sufficient evidence to sustain a guilty verdict. The trial court 

accepted Appellant’s plea, found the evidence sufficient to substantiate Appellant’s guilty plea, 

deferred further proceedings without entering an adjudication of guilt, and ordered that Appellant 

be placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for four years. 

 1 See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. § 32.21(a)(1)(A), (2), (b), (d), (e-2) (West Supp. 2018).
2

Later, the State filed a second amended motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging that Appellant 

violated the terms of his community supervision including committing the offense of theft; 

committing the offense of assault; using, possessing and/or consuming alcohol; failing to report in 

person at least once a month to his community supervision officer from January through February 

2017; failing to permit the community supervision officer to visit his home by neglecting to 

provide a valid address; failing to perform fifty hours of community service; failing to pay his 

supervision fees in the amount of $60.00 per month from June 2016 through February 2017; failing 

to pay court costs, fines, and restitution to the district clerk’s office for the months of June 2016 

through February 2017; failing to report to a scheduled appointment with his community 

supervision officer on December 16, 2016 to provide a new address; failing to complete the 

Cognitive Thinking Class; failing to submit to a substance abuse evaluation; and failing to report 

to a scheduled judicial summons on March 22, 2017. At the hearing, Appellant pleaded “true” to 

all the violations pleaded by the State. 

At the sentencing hearing, Emily White, Appellant’s ex-wife, testified that she was the 

victim of the assault that was one of the bases of the motion to adjudicate. Appellant came to her 

house to pick up their daughter for visitation. White stated that her daughter began “back talking” 

and told her mother “no.” She attempted to punish the child but her daughter ran from her and 

threw herself on the ground. White stated that she grabbed her daughter to spank her, but Appellant 

hit her, White, with his fist on the right side of her jaw. Appellant attempted to take the child, but 

White pushed the child into the house, told Appellant to get off her property, and called law 

enforcement. 

Amy Freeman, a community supervision officer, testified that Appellant did not pay any 

of his supervision fees; did not report to Shelby County when his community supervision was 

transferred to that county; reported two or three months to Nacogdoches County when he was 

transferred to that county; and failed to attend a compliance hearing on March 22, 2017. After the 

sentencing hearing, the trial court found all of the allegations to be “true,” granted the State’s 

motion to adjudicate, adjudged Appellant guilty of two counts of forgery against the elderly, and 

assessed his punishment at eight years of imprisonment to run concurrently. This appeal followed.

ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO ANDERS V. CALIFORNIA
3

Appellant’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders and Gainous, stating that he 

diligently reviewed the appellate record and is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible 

error and that there is no error upon which an appeal can be predicated. From our review of 

counsel’s brief, it is apparent that counsel is well acquainted with the facts in this case. In 

compliance with Anders, Gainous, and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1978), counsel’s brief presents a chronological summation of the procedural history of the case, 

and further states that counsel is unable to raise any arguable issues for appeal.2 We reviewed the 

record for reversible error and found none. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2005).

CONCLUSION

As required by Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), Appellant’s 

counsel moved for leave to withdraw. See also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2008) (orig. proceeding). We carried the motion for consideration with the merits. Having 

done so and finding no reversible error, Appellant’s counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

hereby granted, and the trial court’s judgment is affirmed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2.

Appellant’s counsel has a duty to, within five days of the date of this opinion, send a copy 

of the opinion and judgment to Appellant and advise him of his right to file a petition for 

discretionary review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4; In re Schulman, 22 S.W.3d at 411 n.35. Should 

Appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he 

must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or he must file a pro se 

petition for discretionary review. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408 n.22. Any petition for 

discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from either the date of this opinion or, if a 

motion for rehearing is filed, the date that the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this 

court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a). Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with the 

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review 

 2 In compliance with Kelly v. State, Appellant’s counsel provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, notified 

Appellant of his motion to withdraw as counsel, informed Appellant of his right to file a pro se response, and took 

concrete measures to facilitate Appellant’s review of the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant was given time to file his own brief. The time for filing such brief has expired 

and no pro se brief has been filed.
4

should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4; In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 408 n.22.

Opinion delivered June 28, 2019.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

JUNE 28, 2019

NO. 12-18-00293-CR

STEVEN JACOB BUCK,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from the 159th District Court 

of Angelina County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 2015-0849)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and brief filed 

herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the 

judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment 

of the court below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below 

for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.