Court Opinion

ID: 2863615
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-05 23:50:38.873236+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:37:04.381724
License: Public Domain

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-01-00240-CR

David James Fellows, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

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

NO. 43,082, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING

David James Fellows appeals from an order revoking community supervision.  He
was placed on supervision following a conviction for sexual assault.  See Tex. Pen. Code Ann.
§ 22.011 (West Supp. 2001).

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 order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

  
				Mack Kidd, Justice
Before Justices Kidd, Yeakel and Patterson
Affirmed
Filed:   October 11, 2001
Do Not Publish