In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-13-00086-CR
____________________
CHRISTOPHER M. BRIDGES
A/K/A CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL BRIDGES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________ ______________
On Appeal from the 252nd District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 11-10823
________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In this appeal, counsel for the appellant, Christopher M. Bridges,1 filed a
brief stating that there are no arguable points of error that would allow the court to
give Bridges relief from his conviction. After reviewing the record, we agree that
no arguable issues support Bridges’s appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738, 744 (1967).
1
Appellant is also known by his full name, Christopher Michael Bridges.
1
Bridges pled no contest to burglary of a building, a state jail felony that was
enhanced to a second degree felony based on Bridges’s convictions for two
previous felonies. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 30.02 (West 2011); see also Act of
May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 318, § 1, sec. 12.42(a)(2), 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws
2734, 2734-735 (amended and replaced 2011) (current version at Tex. Penal Code
Ann. § 12.425(b) (West Supp. 2013)).2 Although Bridges and the State had a plea
agreement under which Bridges agreed to plead guilty for a determinate sentence,
the trial court chose to defer adjudicating Bridges’s guilt and placed him on
community supervision for ten years.
Subsequently, the State filed a motion that asked the trial court to revoke its
decision to place Bridges on community supervision. At the revocation hearing,
Bridges pled “true” to violating three of the terms of the trial court’s community
supervision order. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found that
Bridges had violated three of the terms in its community supervision order; then,
2
See Act of May 25, 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., ch. 834, § 5, sec. 12.425(b),
2011 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 2104, 2105 (West) (adding section 12.425, which
provides that a defendant shall be punished for a second-degree felony if it is
shown on the trial of a state jail felony that the defendant has two prior felony
convictions); see also id., § 5, sec. 12.42, 2011 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. at 2104-105
(amending section 12.42 by deleting the language that was substantially similar to
the language added in section 12.425).
2
after adjudicating his guilt, the trial court sentenced Bridges to serve nineteen years
in prison.
On appeal, Bridges’s counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s
professional evaluation of the record. The brief states that Bridges’s appeal is
frivolous. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1978). We granted an extension of time to allow Bridges to file a pro se brief,
and Bridges filed a response.
After reviewing the appellate record, the Anders brief filed by Bridges’s
counsel, and Bridges’s pro se response, we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no
arguable issues support Bridges’s appeal. Therefore, we need not order the
appointment of new counsel to re-brief Bridges’s appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813
S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 3
AFFIRMED.
_________________________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Submitted on March 4, 2014
Opinion Delivered July 9, 2014
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
3
Bridges may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for
discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.
3