COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-13-00257-CR
CHRISTOPHER DONTA MURRY APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM THE 89TH DISTRICT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
After Appellant Christopher Donta Murry pleaded guilty to aggravated
assault, the trial court sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment and a $750 fine,
suspended the imprisonment portion of the sentence, and placed Murry on
community supervision for ten years. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02 (West
Supp. 2011). The State filed a motion to revoke community supervision, alleging
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
that Murry (1) failed to report to his supervision officer for three months, (2) failed
to provide his supervision officer with written proof of completion of the monthly
community service requirements, (3) failed to pay the supervision fee, (4) failed
to pay the crime stopper fee, (5) failed to notify the Community Supervision and
Corrections Department of his change of address, (6) failed to complete the
Cognitive Corrective Training Class and the Anger Management Class, and (7)
failed to timely attend the Probation Orientation class. Murry pleaded true to all
of the above allegations. The trial court found all of the allegations to be true,
revoked Murry’s community supervision, and sentenced him to ten years’
imprisonment.
Murry’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw
as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet
the requirements of Anders v. California2 by presenting a professional evaluation
of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. This
court afforded Murry the opportunity to file a brief on his own behalf, but he did
not do so. The State has filed a letter brief.
As the reviewing court, we must conduct an independent evaluation of the
record to determine whether counsel is correct in determining that the appeal is
frivolous. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991);
Mays v. State, 904 S.W.2d 920, 923 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only
2
386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967).
2
then may we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S.
75, 82–83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).
We have carefully reviewed the record, counsel’s brief, and the State’s
letter brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without
merit; we find nothing in the record that arguably might support an appeal. See
Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827–28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Accordingly,
we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.
.
PER CURIAM
PANEL: WALKER; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and GABRIEL, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: November 14, 2013
3