Kevin Jerome Moore v. State

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



____________________



NO. 09-05-205 CR

____________________



KEVIN JEROME MOORE, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 87194




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Kevin Jerome Moore pled guilty in Cause No. 87194 to the second degree felony offense of burglary of a habitation. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 30.02 (a)(3), (c)(2) (Vernon 2003). The trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and placed Moore on community supervision for ten years commencing June 9, 2003. During the period of community supervision, the State filed a motion to adjudicate that alleged drug screens revealed Moore ingested controlled substances in violation of the terms of the community supervision order. Moore pled "true" to several of the State's allegations. The trial court adjudicated guilt and assessed a twenty year sentence.

Moore'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, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On January 26, 2006, we granted an extension of time for Moore to file a pro se brief. The appellant did not file a response.

We have jurisdiction over the appeal. See Hargesheimer v. State, 182 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). On appeal following adjudication, claims that directly and distinctly relate to punishment may be raised. Hogans v. State, 176 S.W.3d 829 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In this case, the appellant had an opportunity to present evidence during the proceedings. See Pearson v. State, 994 S.W.2d 176, 179 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).

We have reviewed the clerk's and the reporter's records, 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). The trial court's judgment is affirmed. (1)

AFFIRMED.



____________________________

DAVID GAULTNEY

Justice





Submitted on May 22, 2006

Opinion Delivered May 31, 2006

Do Not Publish



Before Gaultney, Kreger and Horton, JJ.

1.

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