Gerke v. State

PER CURIAM

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the felony offense of stalking on February 3, 2012. Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court deferred a finding of guilt, placed appellant on community supervision for five years, and assessed a $500 fine. On March 16, 2012, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt, alleging that appellant had violated the conditions of his community supervision. On August 3, 2012, after a hearing, the trial court found two of the allegations in the motion true, adjudicated appellant's guilt, and sentenced appellant to confinement for nine years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

Appellant's appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).

A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). More than forty-five days have passed, and no pro se response has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief, and we agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. We need not address the merits of each claim raised in an Anders brief or a pro se response when we have determined there are no arguable grounds for review. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827-28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Brown, Christopher, and McCally. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).