Garett Leigh Fine v. State

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § GARETT LEIGH FINE, No. 08-16-00152-CR § Appellant, Appeal from § v. 355th District Court § THE STATE OF TEXAS, of Hood County, Texas § Appellee. (TC # CR12722) § MEMORANDUM OPINION Garret Leigh Fine appeals his conviction of assault causing bodily injury. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered a negotiated plea of guilty. In accordance with the plea bargain, the trial court deferred adjudicating guilt and placed Appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for eight years. The State subsequently filed a motion to proceed with adjudication of guilt. Appellant entered a negotiated plea of true to four paragraphs in the State’s motion. The trial court granted the State’s motion, adjudicated Appellant’s guilt, and assessed his punishment at imprisonment for eight years. We affirm. FRIVOLOUS APPEAL Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008)(“In Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance ‘arguable’ points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities.”); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978). Counsel has notified the Court in writing that he has delivered a copy of counsel’s brief and the motion to withdraw to Appellant, and he has advised Appellant of his right to review the record, file a pro se brief, and to seek discretionary review. Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318-20 (Tex.Crim.App. 2014)(setting forth duties of counsel). Counsel also provided Appellant with a form motion for access to the appellate record. Appellant has not requested access to the record and he has not filed a pro se brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, and we agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. December 21, 2016 ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ. (Do Not Publish) -2-