In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-03-575 CR
____________________
ISAAC LEE BELL, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Orange County, Texas
Trial Cause No. B 970047-R
Isaac Lee Bell appeals the revocation of community supervision. Bell originally pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and was sentenced to eight years of confinement, probated for eight years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke community supervision. After Bell pleaded "true" to some of the State's allegations, the trial court ordered Bell to serve four years of his sentence. We affirm the judgment.
The trial court imposed sentence on October 16, 2003. The clerk's record was filed on December 15, 2003, and the reporter's record was filed July 6, 2004. On February 10, 2005, we remanded the appeal to the trial court for a hearing to determine why the brief had not been filed. Bell appeared at the hearing and informed the trial court that he was not indigent, but that he had not retained counsel because the lawyer who reviewed his case informed him there were no valid grounds for an appeal. Although four or five months elapsed, Bell had not contacted another lawyer about taking his case. Bell informed the trial court, "Well, I'm really not trying to stall. Actually, I'm trying to stay out of prison." The trial court found the appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, is not indigent, has not retained counsel, and has failed to make necessary arrangements for filing a brief. The trial court's written findings conclude, "The defendant, although under a four year prison sentence, has been released on bond for almost sixteen months. While the defendant claims he desires to prosecute his appeal, his conduct indicates he has no intention of actually prosecuting the appeal."
Bell's failure to provide a brief constitutes abandonment of the appeal. Parker v. State, 69 S.W.3d 677, 678 (Tex. App.-Waco 2002, no pet.). Bell is not indigent and has failed to make arrangements for filing a brief. Accordingly, we exercise our authority to consider this appeal without briefs. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). We review the record in the interest of justice. Lott v. State, 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). Having found no unassigned fundamental error, we affirm the judgment.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on April 7, 2005
Opinion Delivered April 13, 2005
Do Not Publish
Before Gaultney, Kreger and Horton, JJ.
1. Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.