Court Opinion

ID: 2863355
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 23:46:50.052637+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:31:09.095911
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-01-00421-CR

Tony Ray Hill, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 46,028, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

Appellant Tony Ray Hill was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision
after pleading guilty to felony criminal mischief and burglary of a habitation.  See Tex. Pen. Code
Ann. §§ 28.03, 30.02 (West Supp. 2002).  The court later revoked supervision, adjudicated appellant
guilty, and sentenced him to ten and twenty-five year terms of imprisonment.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is
frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no
arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573
S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974);
Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised
of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous
and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

				__________________________________________
				David Puryear, Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices B. A. Smith and Puryear
Affirmed
Filed:   December 13, 2001
Do Not Publish