AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number

Charles DAVIS, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

P. PATTERSON, Justice.

In June 2005, appellant Charles Davis pleaded guilty to an information accusing him of possessing cocaine and to two indictments accusing him of family violence assault. See Tex. Health Safety Code Ann. § 481.115 (West 2003), Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.01 (West Supp. 2006). The trial court adjudged him guilty of the three offenses and assessed eight-year prison terms, but the court suspended imposition of the sentences and placed appellant on community supervision. In May 2006, the court revoked supervision in each case after appellant admitted some of the violations alleged in the State's motions to revoke. The court imposed three concurrent five-year prison terms. Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeals are 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 records 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 records and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. We have reviewed the records and counsel's brief and agree that the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeals. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted. The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DAVIS v. STATE, 03-06-00375-CR (Tex.App.-Austin [3rd Dist.] 12-1-2006)
(Dec 1, 2006)