Opinion filed April 18, 2019

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

___________

No. 11-18-00283-CR

___________

WILLIAM EDWARDS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 70th District Court

Ector County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. A-16-1432-CR

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant, William Edwards, originally pleaded guilty to the offense of

aggravated assault with a deadly weapon against a person with whom he had a dating 

or family relationship. Pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, the trial court

deferred a finding of guilt and placed Appellant on community supervision for eight

years and fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to adjudicate 

Appellant’s guilt. At a hearing on that motion, Appellant pleaded true to two of the 

State’s allegations. The State and Appellant presented additional evidence. At the 
2

end of that hearing, the trial court found all of the allegations to be true, revoked 

Appellant’s community supervision, adjudicated Appellant guilty of the charged 

offense, and assessed his punishment at confinement for fifteen years and the 

previously unpaid fine of $500. We affirm. 

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The 

motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously 

examines the record and applicable law and states that he has concluded that this 

appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy 

of the brief, a copy of the motion to withdraw, an explanatory letter, and a copy of 

the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record. Counsel advised Appellant of his right 

to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief. Counsel also advised 

Appellant of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review in order to 

seek review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Court-appointed counsel has

complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967);

Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 

403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1991). 

Appellant has filed a pro se response to counsel’s Anders brief. Appellant 

asserts in his response that he is innocent and that he did not commit the crime of 

which he was convicted and to which he pleaded guilty. In addressing an Anders

brief and a pro se response, a court of appeals may only determine (1) that the appeal 

is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record 

and finds no reversible error or (2) that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand 

the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues. 

Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2005). 
3

Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have 

independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit. 

We note that proof of one violation of the terms and conditions of community 

supervision is sufficient to support revocation. Smith v. State, 286 S.W.3d 333, 342 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2009). In this regard, a plea of true standing alone is sufficient to 

support a trial court’s decision to revoke community supervision and proceed with 

an adjudication of guilt. See Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469, 470 (Tex. Crim. App.

[Panel Op.] 1979). Furthermore, absent a void judgment, issues relating to an 

original plea proceeding may not be raised in a subsequent appeal from the 

revocation of community supervision and adjudication of guilt. Jordan v. State, 54 

S.W.3d 783, 785–86 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 

661–62 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Based upon our review of the record, we agree 

with counsel that no arguable grounds for appeal exist. 

The motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment of the trial court is 

affirmed.

PER CURIAM

April 18, 2019

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., 

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J.1

Willson, J., not participating.

 

1

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.