Court Opinion

ID: 2876281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-06 06:44:29.675281+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:31:45.780729
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

                                       NO. 03-09-00131-CR

                             Michael Clifton Broughton, Appellant

                                                  v.

                                   The State of Texas, Appellee

      FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
          NO. 61549, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING

                            MEMORANDUM OPINION

               On August 20, 2007, following a guilty plea, appellant Michael Clifton Broughton

was adjudged guilty of failing to appear in a felony case and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment.

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.10 (West 2003). As provided in a plea bargain agreement,

imposition of sentence was suspended and appellant was placed on community supervision. On

February 6, 2009, appellant’s supervision was revoked and sentence was imposed after he pleaded

true to several of the allegations in the State’s motion to revoke.

               Appellant’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by 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). Appellant received a copy of counsel’s

brief and 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.

                                               ____________________________________________

                                               J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Waldrop and Henson

Affirmed

Filed: August 6, 2009

Do Not Publish

                                                   2