Court Opinion

ID: 4313769
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-09-20 02:24:22.581104+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:08:54.364789
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                             ____________________

                              NO. 09-18-00084-CR
                             ____________________

                    SHANE HOYT BRADSHAW, Appellant

                                        V.

                   THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________

                On Appeal from the 253rd District Court
                        Liberty County, Texas
                      Trial Cause No. CR32205
__________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Shane Hoyt Bradshaw

pleaded guilty to assault involving family violence. The trial court found Bradshaw

guilty and assessed punishment at two years of confinement, then suspended

imposition of sentence, placed Bradshaw on community supervision for two years,

and assessed a $750 fine. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke

Bradshaw’s community supervision. Bradshaw pleaded “not true” to the seven

alleged violations of the terms of the community supervision order. After conducting

                                         1
an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found that Bradshaw violated the terms of the

community supervision order, revoked Bradshaw’s community supervision, and

imposed a sentence of two years of confinement.

       Bradshaw’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s

professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1978). On May 24, 2018, we granted an extension of time for Bradshaw

to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Bradshaw.

      We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion

that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order

appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d
503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1

      AFFIRMED.

                                             ______________________________
                                                    STEVE McKEITHEN
                                                        Chief Justice

      1
        Bradshaw may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.

                                         2
Submitted on September 6, 2018
Opinion Delivered September 19, 2018
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

                                       3