Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2007

Tonya Terrier Corral A/K/A Tonya Terrier Hinson v. State

Tonya Terrier Corral A/K/A Tonya Terrier Hinson v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided June 6, 2007

Tonya Terrier Corral A/K/A Tonya Terrier Hinson v. State

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________



NO. 09-06-497 CR

NO. 09-06-498 CR

NO. 09-06-499 CR

____________________



TONYA TERRIER CORRAL a/k/a TONYA TERRIER HINSON, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee



and



TONYA MELISSA CORRAL, Appellant



V.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause Nos. 88098, 90169, and 91882




MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to plea bargain agreements, appellant Tonya Corral pled guilty to forgery and two charges of burglary of a habitation. (1) In each of the three cases, the trial court found the evidence was sufficient to find Corral guilty, but deferred finding her guilty. In the forgery case, the trial court placed Corral on community supervision for four years and ordered her to serve six months in a state jail facility as a condition of her community supervision. In each of the two burglary cases, the trial court placed Corral on community supervision for eight years and ordered her to pay restitution. In each of the three cases, the State subsequently filed motions to revoke Corral's unadjudicated community supervision. In each, Corral pled "true" to four of the alleged violations of the terms of her community supervision. In each of the cases, the trial court found that Corral violated four of the conditions of her community supervision and found her guilty. In the forgery case, the trial court assessed punishment at two years of confinement in a state jail facility. The trial court assessed punishment at twelve years of confinement in TDCJ in each of the burglary cases. The trial court ordered that the sentences in all three cases were to run concurrently.

Corral's appellate counsel filed a brief in each case that presents counsel's professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On March 1, 2007, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief in each case. We received no response from the appellant. We reviewed the appellate records, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeals. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgments. (2)

AFFIRMED.



_________________________________

HOLLIS HORTON

Justice

Submitted on May 29, 2007

Opinion Delivered June 6, 2007

Do Not Publish



Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.









1. In the forgery case, appellant's name is stated as "Tonya Terrier Corral a/k/a Tonya Terrier Hinson." In the burglary cases, appellant's name is stated as "Tonya Melissa Corral."

2.Appellant may challenge our decision in these cases by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.