LaFloydria Lynette Johnson v. State

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________



NO. 09-07-084 CR

____________________



LAFLOYDRIA LYNETTE JOHNSON, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 93382




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant LaFloydria Lynette Johnson pled guilty to burglary of a habitation. On March 7, 2005, the trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Johnson guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Johnson on community supervision for five years, assessed a fine of $1,000, and ordered Johnson to pay restitution in the amount of $85. On July 17, 2006, the State filed a motion to revoke Johnson's unadjudicated community supervision. Johnson pled "true" to one violation of the conditions of her community supervision and "not true" to four other alleged violations. After conducting a hearing, the trial court found that Johnson violated five conditions of her community supervision, found Johnson guilty of burglary of a habitation, and assessed punishment at eleven years of confinement.

Johnson'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 June 7, 2007, we granted an extension of time for Johnson to file a pro se brief. We received no response from appellant. We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgment. (1)

AFFIRMED.

STEVE McKEITHEN

Chief Justice



Submitted on September 28, 2007

Opinion Delivered October 10, 2007

Do Not Publish



Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.

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