Johnny Ray Embers, Jr. v. State
Opinion
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-12-00047-CR NO. 03-12-00048-CR Johnny Ray Embers, Jr., Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOS. 62717 & 68012, HONORABLE MARTHA J. TRUDO, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION In 2007, appellant Johnny Ray Embers, Jr. was charged with sexual assault of a child. He pled guilty under a plea bargain and was placed on deferred adjudication for ten years. In May 2011, he was charged with failure to register as a sex offender. Shortly after that indictment issued, the State filed a motion to adjudicate Embers’s sexual-assault charge, alleging he had violated the terms of his community supervision by, among other things, possessing marihuana, failing to register as a sex offender, missing probation appointments, failing to pay court costs, fees, or restitution, and failing to serve a required jail term with work release. Without entering into a plea bargain, Embers pled true to the motion to adjudicate and pled guilty to failure to register. The trial court adjudicated his guilt for sexual assault and found him guilty of failing to register and gave him concurrent sentences of eighteen years for sexual assault and ten years for failure to register. Embers’s appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.
Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743-44 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at 743- 44; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811-13 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684, 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Embers’s attorney sent Embers a copy of the brief and advised him that he had the right to examine the record and file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972). No pro se brief has been filed.
Having reviewed the record and the procedures that were observed, we agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the judgment of conviction.1
__________________________________________
David Puryear, Justice
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Henson Affirmed Filed: August 15, 2012 Do Not Publish
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.