SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 1 

## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 07- 049- CR
DAN I E LM AL DON ADO AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 371STDI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppe l l ant D ani el M al dona do att em pt s t o app ea l f r om t he t r i alc o u rt’s d e term i n a ti o n to p roc e e d to a d j u d i c a ti o n . T h e rec o rd s h o w s th a t pu rsu a n t t o a p l e a b a rga i n ag ree m e n t, A p p e l l a n t plea d e d g u i l ty to ag g rav a ted as sa u l t w i th a d ea dl y w ea pon, an d t he tri a l co urtpl ac ed hi m on d ef er r ed adj udi ca t i on com m uni t y super vi si on f or seven year s on D ecem ber8, 20 06 . The S t at e f i l ed3 8 6 U .S . 7 3 8 , 8 7 S . C t. 1 3 9 6 (1 9 6 7 ). 2 Se eMa ys v. S tate , 9 0 4S .W .2 d 9 2 0 , 9 2 2

– 2 3 ( T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 3 1 9 9 5 , n o p e t.). 2 a pet i t i on t o pr oceed t o adj udi cat i on on D ecem ber28 , 20 06 , al l egi ng t hat A ppe l l antvi ol at ed t he t er m s ofhi s d ef er r ed adj udi ca t i on byco m m i tt i ng t he ad d i t i o n a l o f f e n s e o f a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t wi t h a d e a d l y we a p o n , t o w hi ch A ppel l antpl eaded “not t r ue. ” O n Febr uar y 2, 20 07 , t he t r i al courtf oun d t hat A ppe l l ant had com m i t t ed t he l es se r - i ncl ude d of f ens e o fas sa ul t
— bodi l y i nj ury, p roc e e d e d to a d j u d i c a ti o n , a n d se n ten c e d A p p e l l a n t to ten y e a rs’ co n fi n e m e n t. A p p e l l a n t’ s c o u rt -ap p o i n ted ap p e l l a te c o u n s e l h a s fi l e d a m o ti o n to
w i t hdr aw as coun sel and a br i efi n suppo rtoft hatm ot i on. I n t he br i ef , counsel hasr evi ew ed t he hi st ory oft he ca se , i ncl udi ng de t ai l i ng t he evi den cepr es ent ed. C o u n se l ’s b ri e f a n d m o ti o n m e e t t h e req u i rem e n ts o f A n der sv. Ca lif

o r nia by 2 p re s e n ti n g a p ro fe s s i o n a l e v a l u a ti o n o f th e re c o rd d e m o n s tra ti n g w h yth e rea re no r eve r si bl e g r oundson a ppe alan d r ef er enc i ng a ny g r oundst hatm i ght
a rg u a b l ys u p p o rt t h e a p p e a l . A p p e l l a n t fi l e d a p ro s e b ri e f a s k i n g fo r a 3
re d u c ti o n i n s e n te n c e , a j u d g m e n t o f a c q u i tta l , a n d a re v e rs a l o f th e tri a l c o u rt’s “j udgm entofr evo ca ti on”duet o e r r or s t hatal l ege dl y oc cur r ed dur i ng t he
r evo ca t i on he ar i ng.Se eSta f f ord v. S tate , 8 1 3 S .W .2 d 5 0 3 , 5 1 1 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 1 9 9 1 ); 4 Mays , 904 S. W . 2d a t923. Se ePen s o nv. O hio , 4 8 8 U .S . 7 5 , 8 3

– 8 4 , 1 0 9 S . C t. 3 4 6 , 3 5 1 (1 9 8 8 ). 5 SeeT EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . art . 42 . 12 , § 5 ( b) ( V er non 20 06 ) ( f or m er 6 ve r s i on ) ( “ No a pp e a l m a y be t a k e n f r om t hi s de t e r m i na t i on [ t o pr oc e e d to a d j u d i c a ti o n ].”), am ended by Act of M a y 28, 2007, 80t h L e g. , R. S. , c h. 1308 , § § 5 3 , 6 8 , 2 0 0 7 T e x . G e n . L a w s4 4 0 4 , 4 4 2 1 , 4 4 2 2

– 2 3 (V e r n o n ) ( “ T h is det er m i nat i on i s r evi ew abl e i n t he sa m e m ann er as a r evo ca ti o n he ar i ng con duc t ed unde rSect i on 21 of t hi s art i cl e i n a ca se i n w hi ch an adj udi ca t i on of g u i l t h a d n o t b e e n d e fe rre d .” ); se e a l so D a vi s v. S tate , 195 S. W . 3d 708, 710 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 6 ). SeeT EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . A NN . a rt. 4 2 .1 2 , § 5 (b ) (fo rm e r v e rs i o n ). 7 3 I n ourdut i esasa r evi ew i ng c ourt , w e m us tco nduc tan i nde p e n den t
eva l uat i on oft he r ec or d t o de t er m i ne w het herco uns eli s cor r ec ti n de t er m i ni ng th a t t h e ap p e a l i s fri v o l o u s. O n l ythe n m a yw e g ran t co u n se l ’s m o ti o n to 4 wi t h d r a w. 5 Th e f or m erver si on of art i cl e 42 . 12 , sect i o n 5 (b ), w hi ch pr ohi bi t ed appeal s f r om t he t r i al court ’ s deci si on to a d judi cat e, appl i es t o t hi s case because t he r evocat i on hear i ngs w er e hel d bef or e June 1 5, 20 07 . Ther ef or e, 6 A p p e l l a n t m a yn o t co m p l a i n o n ap p e a l ab o u t t h e tr i a l co u rt ’s d e c i s i o n to pr oce ed t o a dj udi ca t i on. 7 To t he ext entt hatA ppel l anti nt ended i n hi s pr o se br i ef t o com pl ai n t hat h iss e n t e n c e ise x c e s s iv e , w e n o t e t h a ta g g r a v a t e d a s s a u ltw it h a d e a d ly
w eapon i s a f i r st - degr ee f el ony, pun i shabl e by f i ve t o ni net y-n in e y e ar s’T EX . P EN AL C ODE A NN . § § 1 2 .3 2 (a ), 2 2 .0 2 (b )(1 ) (V e rn o n 2 0 0 3 ). 8Ho l le yv. S ta te, 1 6 7 S .W .3 d 5 4 6 , 5 4 9

– 5 0 ( T e x . A p p .— H o u sto n [ 1 4 th 9 D i st . ] 2005 , pe t . r ef ’ d) ( ci t i ng nu m ero u s c a s eshol di ng t hat“ a p uni sh m ent w i th i n th e s ta tu to ryg u i d e l i n e si sn o t e x c e s s i v e ” ). Se eBle ds o ev. S tate, 178 S . W . 3d 824, 827– 28 ( Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 10 2 0 0 5 ). 4 i nca r ce r at i on. The r ec or d c ont ai ns no i ndi ca t i on t hatA ppe l l antobj ec t ed t o or 8 f i l ed a m ot i on f orne w t r i al cha l l eng i ng hi s se nt enc e. M or eov er , A ppe l l ant ’ s t enyearsent ence i s w i t hi n t he per m i ssi bl e r ange. 9 W e have car ef ul l y r evi ew ed cou nsel ’ s br i efand t he r ecor d. W e agr ee
w i t h c ouns elt hatt hi s app ea l i s w hol l y f ri v o l o u s a nd w i t houtm er i t ; w e f i nd
n o th i n g i n th e re c o rd th a t a rg u a b l ym i g h t s u p p o rt th e a p p e a l . A c c o rd i n g l y , w e 10 g ran t co u n se l ’s m o ti o n to w i th d raw an d affi rm the tr i a l co u rt ’s j u d g m e n t.

P E RCU R I AM
PA N EL F: G A RD N ER, H O LM A N , an d W A LKER, JJ. DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: M a r c h 13, 2008