Robert Scott Paradise v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

---

NO. 03-01-00004-CR

---

Robert Scott Paradise, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

---

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. B-99-0393-S, HONORABLE BEN WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDING

---

Robert Scott Paradise appeals from an order revoking community supervision.  The underlying offense is burglary of a building.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann.  30.02 (West Supp. 2001).   The sentence is incarceration in a state jail for one year.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed:   August 9, 2001

Do Not Publish

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

---

NO. 03-01-00004-CR

---

Robert Scott Paradise, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

---

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY, 119TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. B-99-0393-S, HONORABLE BEN WOODWARD, JUDGE PRESIDING

---

Robert Scott Paradise appeals from an order revoking community supervision.  The underlying offense is burglary of a building.  See Tex. Penal Code Ann.  30.02 (West Supp. 2001).   The sentence is incarceration in a state jail for one year.

Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced.  See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969).  A copy of counsel's brief was delivered to appellant, and appellant was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief.  No pro se brief has been filed.

We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.  We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal.

The order revoking community supervision is affirmed.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Kidd, B. A. Smith and Puryear

Affirmed

Filed:   August 9, 2001

Do Not Publish