Jermaine Sims v. State

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-12-00475-CR ____________________ JERMAINE SIMS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ ______________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 10-08895 ____________________________________________ ____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Jermaine Sims pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to substantiate Sims’s guilt, deferred further proceedings, and placed Sims on community supervision for eight years. The State later filed a motion to revoke Sims’s community supervision. Sims pleaded “true” to violating three conditions of his community supervision. The trial court found that Sims violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Sims guilty of unlawful 1 possession of a firearm by a felon, revoked Sims’s community supervision, and sentenced Sims to ten years in prison. Sims’s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes Sims’s appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On April 19, 2013, we granted an extension of time for Sims to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Sims. We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently examined the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and we agree that no arguable issues support an appeal. 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STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on September 16, 2013 Opinion Delivered September 25, 2013 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 1 Sims may challenge our decision by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2