Brandon Master v. State

NO. 04-15-00100-CR IN THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS BRANDON MASTER, Fj JJ^ ^ Appellant THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR PROSE ACCESS TO THE APPELLATE RECORD TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: COMES NOW the Appellant in the above styled and numbered cause and files this Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record. I. Appellant's appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw and brief in support of the motion, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). II. The undersigned Appellant wishes to exercise his right to review the appellate record in preparing his pro se response to the Anders brief that court- appointed counsel has filed. The undersigned Appellant now moves this Court to provide him with free, pro se access to the appellate record, including the clerk's record and reporter's record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318-19 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). III. The undersigned Appellant is presently incarcerated and lacks access to a computer. For that reason, he respectfully requests that a paper copy of the appellate record be provided to him. He also asks for a 30-day extension of time to file his pro se brief. IV. This motion is addressed to the Fourth Court of Appeals, Cadena-Reeves Justice Center, 300 Dolorosa St., Suite 3200, San Antonio, Texas 78205. This motion is delivered to the Fourth Court of Appeals by U.S. Mail, on this the 1(5*^ day of huotosk , 2015. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Appellant respectfully prays that the Court grant this Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record. Respectfully submitted, Brandon Master TDCJ# 01653759 Garza West Transfer Facility 4250 HWY 202 Beeville,TX 78102 APPELLANT PROSE RR at 35). Appellant was alone in the apartment and said his girlfriend hadn't been V there for four days. (1 RRat 35-36)CSantiago found a pipe used for smoking Icrack" or marijuana on Appellant's bed. (1 RR at 38Y/He also found a knife with an eight-inch blade. (1 RR at 38). Appellant said the knife was his, but not the pipe. (1 RR at 40). The knife was a violation of probation because Appellant was not supposed to possess any weapons. (1 RR at 42). Defense counsel called Bill Bohneblust to testify. He is also a Bexar County probation officer. (1 RR at 45). Bohneblust supervised Appellant "for about a year" and had "no trouble" with him. (1 RR at 45). He supervised Appellant in 2013 and 2014.(1 RRat49). The revocation hearing resumed the next day. (2 RR at 1). Appellant pleaded "true with an explanation" to the allegation that he violated condition number 2 by failing to submit to drug testing on January 16, 2015. (2 RR at 4). He entered the same plea to the allegations that he violated condition number 6-C by possessing the pipe and violated condition number 11 by possessing the knife. (2 RR at 4). Appellant blamed transportation problems for his failure to submit to the drug test on January 16, 2015. (2 RR at 5). He said the pipe was not his, but admitted that he owned the knife that was found in his apartment. (2 RR at 5-6). Defense counsel asked the trial court to continue Appellant's probation. (2 RR at 8-9). The prosecutor reminded the trial court of Appellant's many prior .- ■ u ■.