Court Opinion

ID: 3076477
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 01:20:05.241843+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:41.362795
License: Public Domain

In The

                                  Court of Appeals
                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                             ____________________
                                 NO. 09-12-00494-CR
                             ____________________

                      MARK PERRY ROBBINS, Appellant

                                         V.

                        THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________            ______________

                    On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
                           Jefferson County, Texas
                          Trial Cause No. 07-01674
________________________________________________________            _____________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Mark Perry Robbins pleaded guilty under a plea agreement to the offense of

felony driving while intoxicated. A child was a passenger in the vehicle. The trial

court placed Robbins on deferred adjudication community supervision. Robbins

violated a condition of the supervision. The State filed a motion to revoke. Robbins

pleaded “true” to the violation of his community supervision. The trial court

revoked the supervision, adjudicated his guilt, and sentenced him to two years of

confinement in the state jail.

                                         1
      Robbins’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional

evaluation of this record. Counsel concludes there are no arguable points of error.

See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967);

High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). This Court granted an

extension of time for appellant to file a pro se response. We received no response.

We have reviewed the clerk’s record, the reporter’s record, and the Anders brief.

We agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. See

Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The trial court’s

judgment is affirmed.

      AFFIRMED.

                                             ______________________________
                                                     DAVID GAULTNEY
                                                          Justice

Submitted on June 21, 2013
Opinion Delivered June 26, 2013
Do Not Publish

Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.

                                         2