In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-06-310 CR
____________________
TIMOTHY JACK VENABLE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 93528
Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant Timothy Jack Venable pleaded guilty to burglary of a building. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Venable guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Venable on community supervision for two years, ordered Venable to serve one hundred eighty days "up front" time in a state jail facility, and ordered Venable to pay restitution in the amount of $3,000. On May 17, 2005, Venable filed a pro se motion to revoke his probation. On January 4, 2006, the State filed a motion to revoke Venable's unadjudicated probation. Venable pleaded "true" to three violations of the conditions of his probation. The trial court found that Venable violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Venable guilty of burglary of a building, and assessed punishment at eighteen months of confinement in a state jail facility.
Venable'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). 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.
__________________________________
CHARLES KREGER
Justice
Submitted on February 13, 2007
Opinion Delivered February 28, 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Do not publish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.