Edwin Charles Hadnot v. State of Texas

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-01-210 CR

____________________



EDWIN CHARLES HADNOT, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the Criminal District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 78311




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Edwin Charles Hadnot pleaded guilty to the second degree felony offense of burglary of a habitation. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02(a)(3) (Vernon Supp. 2002). Following a plea bargain agreement between Hadnot and the State, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed Hadnot on community supervision for ten years. Subsequently, the court found Hadnot violated the terms of community supervision and sentenced Hadnot to confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, for ten years.

Appellate counsel filed a brief that concludes no arguable error is presented in this appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On January 24, 2002, Hadnot was given an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant. Because the appeal involves the application of well-settled principles of law, we deliver this memorandum opinion. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.1.

The general notice of appeal filed by Hadnot failed to invoke our appellate jurisdiction. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428-29 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Cooper v. State, 45 S.W.3d 77, 78 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d 711, 714-715 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). (1) No error relating to the process by which he was punished was preserved at trial or raised on appeal. Compare Vidaurri v. State, 49 S.W.3d 880 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).

We have reviewed the clerk's record and the reporter's record, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Hadnot raises no points of error over which we have jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM



Submitted on April 26, 2002

Opinion Delivered May 1, 2002

Do Not Publish



Before Walker, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.

1. The notice of appeal must specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state the trial court granted permission to appeal.

Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3).