Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-19-00268-CR
Stacy James SPENCER,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2018CR2340
Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Delivered and Filed: February 19, 2020
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED
Appellant Stacy James Spencer pled guilty to the third-degree felony offense of assault of
a household member, which was enhanced to a second-degree felony by a prior assault conviction.
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.01(b). Spencer was sentenced on June 27, 2018, to ten years’
incarceration, which was suspended for ten years of community supervision. On September 19,
2018, the State filed a motion to revoke Spencer’s community supervision, which resulted in
Spencer’s conditions of community supervision being amended. On March 19, 2019, the State
filed a second motion to revoke Spencer’s community supervision. During a revocation hearing
04-19-00268-CR
held on April 18, 2019, Spencer pled “true” to violating two conditions of his community
supervision. After receiving Spencer’s sworn testimony, the trial court found the allegations that
Spencer violated conditions of his community supervision to be “true.” The trial court revoked
Spencer’s community supervision and reformed the sentence to six years’ imprisonment, crediting
Spencer for the time he served while incarcerated on the charge. Two months later, the trial court
signed a nunc pro tunc order that corrected the time credited. Spencer now appeals.
Spencer’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the
record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and a motion to withdraw.
Counsel concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Spencer with a copy of the brief
and informed him of his right to review the record and to file his own brief. See Kelly v. State, 436
S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85–86 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.) (per curiam); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Spencer thereafter filed a pro se brief. After reviewing the
record, counsel’s brief, and Spencer’s pro se brief, we conclude there is no reversible error and
agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–
27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed, and appellate counsel’s motion to
withdraw is granted. 1 See Nichols, 954 S.W.2d at 86; Bruns, 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1.
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
DO NOT PUBLISH
1
No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Spencer wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court
of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or must file a pro se
petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date
of either this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2.
Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals. See id. 68.3. Any petition for
discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See
id. 68.4.
-2-