Court Opinion

ID: 2866189
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 01:35:42.680194+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:14.341822
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                      NO. 03-03-00405-CR

                           Jerome Morgan Middlebrook, Appellant

                                                 v.

                                  The State of Texas, Appellee

      FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
            NO. 46795, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant Jerome Morgan Middlebrook was placed on deferred adjudication

community supervision after he pleaded guilty to aggravated assault against a public servant. Tex.

Pen. Code Ann. § 22.02 (West Supp. 2003). At a subsequent hearing on the State’s motion to

adjudicate, appellant pleaded true to all but one of the alleged violations of supervision. The court

adjudged him guilty and sentenced him to ten years’ 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 he 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 judgment of conviction is affirmed.

                                              __________________________________________

                                              Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Kidd and Patterson

Affirmed

Filed: November 20, 2003

Do Not Publish

                                                  2