NO. 06-15-00091-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT TEXARKANA, TEXAS

CHRISTOPHER WAYNE WILDER, 

Appellant

VS. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

Appealed from the 276th Judicial District Court

Marion County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F14492

BRIEF OF APPELLANT

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW

 Submitted by: 

 James P. Finstrom 

Counsel for Appellant

 P.O. Box 276

Jefferson, Texas 75657

 903-665-7111

 Fax: 903-665-7167

 State Bar #07038000

APPELLANT DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT

ACCEPTED

06-15-00091-CR

SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

TEXARKANA, TEXAS

7/17/2015 11:28:38 AM

DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK

 RECEIVED IN 6th COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 7/17/2015 11:28:38 AM DEBBIE AUTREY Clerk
2

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(a)

Appellant: Christopher Wayne Wilder

Institutional Division of Texas Department 

of Criminal Justice

#02001232

Joe F. Gurney Unit

1385 FM 3328

Tennessee Colony, Texas 75803

Appellant’s Counsel for Appellant at hearing on State’s petition to 

revoke probated sentence

Hon. Robert L. Cole, Jr.

409 Fredonia, Suite 101

Longview, Texas 75601

Appellant’s Counsel on appeal: 

Hon. James P. Finstrom 

P.O. Box 276

Jefferson, Texas 75657

State’s Counsel at hearing on motion to adjudicate and on appeal: 

Hon. Angela Smoak, County Attorney

102 West Austin Street

Jefferson, Texas 75657 

Trial Judge: 

Hon. Robert Rolston, Judge, 

276th Judicial District Court

Marion County, Texas 
3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(b) 

 Page

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES 5

STATEMENT OF THE CASE 6

ISSUE PRESENTED 7 

ISSUE NO. 1: DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE 

EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE COURT’S 

ORDER ADJUDICATING APPELLANT’S GUILT HAVE 

MERIT ON APPEAL?

ISSUE NO. 2: DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE 

JUDICIAL CONFESSION OF APPELLANT WHEN HE 

PLEADED GUILTY AND RECEIVED A TEN YEAR 

SENTENCE PROBATED FOR EIGHT YEARS AND A 

$2500.00 FINE IS SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE 

JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT REVOKING HIS 

PROBATION AFTER HIS PLEAS OF TRUE TO SOME OF

THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MOTION TO REVOKE HIS 

PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON APPEAL? 

ISSUE NO. ONE (Restated) 7

DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS 

SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE COURT’S ORDER 

REVOKING APPELLANT’S PROBATION HAVE MERIT 

ON APPEAL?

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 7

ARGUMENT (Issue No. 1) 8
4

ISSUE NO. TWO (Restated) 8

DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE JUDICIAL CONFESSION

OF APPELLANT WHEN HE PLEAD GUILTY AND RECEIVED 

A TEN YEAR SENTENCE PROBATED FOR EIGHT YEARS 

AND A $2500.00 FINE IS SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE 

JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT REVOKING HIS 

PROBATION AFTER HIS PLEAS OF TRUE TO SOME OF 

THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MOTION TO REVOKE HIS 

PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON APPEAL? 

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT 9

ARGUMENT (Issue No. 2) 9

PRAYER 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 10
5

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(c)

Cases: Page

Burns v. State, 835 S.W.2d 733 7

(Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1992, p.d.r. ref.)

Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343 (Crim.App. 1970) 8

Statutes: 

All references to Texas statutes, rules, etc. are to the latest 

edition published by West Publishing Company, unless otherwise 

noted. 
6

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(d)

Appellant entered a plea of guilty on August 7, 2014, to an 

indictment alleging the third degree felony offense Of Failure To 

Comply With Sex Offenders Duty To Register committed on June 30, 

2013, and received a ten (10) year sentence in the Institutional 

Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice probated for 

eight (8) years and a $2500.00 fine. (CR 22-23) On January 14, 

2014, Appellee filed State’s Petition to Revoke Probated Judgment. 

(CR 25-26) On May 20, 2015, Appellant entered a plea of true to 

alleged violations numbered one through five in the Petition to 

Revoke and the Court heard evidence and revoked Appellant’s 

probation, sentencing him to seven (7) years in Institutional Division 

of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. (CR 37-38, RR 1, 8-10, 

46-47) Appellant gave timely notice of appeal on May 22, 2015. 

(CR 39) Counsel was appointed to represent Appellant on appeal on

June 5, 2015. (CR 40) Counsel for Appellant believes that the 

appeal of this cause is without merit and submits this brief with his 

motion to withdraw from representation in this cause. 
7

Counsel for Appellant is sending a copy of this Brief and a copy 

of the clerk’s transcript and court reporter’s record to Appellant the 

date this Brief is filed. 

ISSUES PRESENTED

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(e)

ISSUE NO 1: DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS 

SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE COURT’S ORDER REVOKING 

APPELLANT’S PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON APPEAL?

ISSUE NO. 2: DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE JUDICIAL 

CONFESSION OF APPELLANT WHEN HE 

PLEADED GUILTY AND RECEIVED A TEN YEAR SENTENCE 

PROBATED FOR EIGHT YEARS AND A $2500.00 FINE IS 

SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL 

COURT REVOKING HIS PROBATION AFTER HIS PLEAS OF

TRUE TO SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MOTION TO 

REVOKE HIS PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON APPEAL? 

ISSUE NO. ONE

(Restated)

DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE EVIDENCE IS SUFFICIENT TO 

SUSTAIN THE COURT’S ORDER REVOKING APPELLANT’S 

PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON APPEAL?

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

 Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(g) 

Appellant discerns no potential issues to be raised on the 

appeal of this cause other than the sufficiency of evidence to support 

the judgment of the trial court finding Appellant guilty and probating 
8

his sentence and the sufficiency of the evidence to support the order 

of the trial court revoking his probation. Neither have merit under the 

authorities hereinafter set forth. No other issues were raised in the 

record. 

ARGUMENT

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(h)

Issue No. 1

Appellant entered pleas of true to five of the allegations of 

violation of probation alleged against him. (RR 8-9) These alone are 

sufficient to sustain the trial court’s order revoking probation. See 

Burns v. State, 835 S.W.2d 733 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 1992, 

p.d.r. ref.) There are no other issues legal presented in connection 

with the revocation proceeding which might arguably result in reversal 

of the trial court’s order revoking probation. 

ISSUE NO. TWO

(Restated)

DOES THE ISSUE WHETHER THE JUDICIAL CONFESSION OF 

APPELLANT WHEN HE PLEADED GUILTY AND RECEIVED A TEN 

YEAR SENTENCE PROBATED FOR EIGHT YEARS AND A 

$2500.00 FINE IS SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN THE JUDGMENT OF 

THE TRIAL COURT REVOKING HIS PROBATION AFTER HIS 

PLEAS OF TRUE TO SOME OF THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE 

MOTION TO REVOKE HIS PROBATION HAVE MERIT ON 

APPEAL? 
9

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

 Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(g) 

See summary presented for Issue No. 1 above. 

ARGUMENT

Pursuant to T.R.A.P. 38.1(h)

Issue No. 2

It has long been the law that a judicial confession standing 

alone is sufficient to support a finding of guilty and assessment of 

punishment after a plea of guilty. (CR 9-11) See Dinnery v. State, 

592 S.W.2d 343 (Crim.App. 1970) No other issues were preserved 

for appeal in connection with Appellant’s plea of guilty as part of a 

plea bargain. 

PRAYER

Upon the issues presented, counsel for Appellant, Christopher 

Wayne Wilder, is of the opinion that Appellant’s appeal is without 

merit in this case prays that he be permitted to withdraw in this case 

and for such other and further relief to which Appellant may be 

entitled. 
10

Respectfully submitted, 

_/s/James P. Finstrom____

James P. Finstrom 

Counsel for Appellant

202 S. Marshall, 

P.O. Box 276

Jefferson, Texas 75657

903-665-7111

Fax: 903-665-7167

Texas Bar #07038000

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that I have delivered a true copy of this brief to Hon.

Angela Smoak, counsel for the State, and to Appellant by United 

States mail, first class postage prepaid, at the Joe F. Gurney Unit, 

1385 FM 3328, Tennessee Colony, Texas 75803, on this 17th day of

July, 2015. 

__/s/James P. Finstrom___

James P. Finstrom 

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I certify that Appellant’s Brief filed electronically on this 17th day 

of July, 2015 complies with Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(i)(2)(B). This Brief 

contains 1,279 words.

/s/ James P. Finstrom

James P. Finstrom