Court Opinion

ID: 2866096
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 01:34:54.467767+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:35.508352
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                      NO. 03-03-00219-CR

                             Robert Keith Bricker, Jr., Appellant

                                                v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee

      FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
          NO. 53186, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               In March 2002, appellant Robert Keith Bricker, Jr., pleaded guilty to burglary. See

Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02 (West 2003). He was convicted by the court and sentenced to ten years

in prison, but imposition of sentence was suspended and he was placed on community supervision.

In April 2003, appellant pleaded true to the allegations made in the State’s motion to revoke. The

court revoked supervision and imposed the ten-year sentence.

               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, who 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. Counsel’s

motion to withdraw is granted.

               The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

                                              __________________________________________

                                              Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, Patterson and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed: December 11, 2003

Do Not Publish

                                                  2