Tremar Artae Jones v. State

In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-16-00051-CR

TREMAR ARTAE JONES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 54th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-2229-C2

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Burgess MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Tremar Artae Jones pled guilty to possession of less than one gram of cocaine in a drug-free zone.1 In accordance with the sentencing recommendations included in the plea agreement, on January 14, 2015, the trial court sentenced Jones to five years’ incarceration, fined him $750.00, suspended the five-year sentence, and placed Jones on five years’ community supervision. Subsequently, in October 2015, the State moved to revoke Jones’ community supervision alleging that Jones had committed thirteen violations of the conditions of his community supervision. Jones pled not true to all thirteen violations alleged by the State, and following the presentation of evidence of Jones’ violation of four of the thirteen conditions, the trial court sentenced Jones to five years’ incarceration together with the original $750.00 fine. Jones appeals.2

Jones’ appellate attorney filed a brief setting out the procedural history of the case, summarizing the evidence elicited during the course of the trial court proceedings, and concluding that the appellate record presents no arguable grounds to be raised on appeal. Meeting the requirements of Anders v. California, counsel has provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no plausible appellate issues to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743–44 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App.

2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509–10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812–13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal. Counsel sent copies of his brief and motion to withdraw to Jones, provided him with a copy of the appellate record, and advised Jones of his right to review the record and file a pro se response. We received neither a pro se response from Jones nor a motion requesting an extension of time in which to file such a response.

We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the entire appellate record and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial court’s judgment. Id.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court.3

Ralph K. Burgess Justice

Date Submitted: June 24, 2016

Date Decided: July 14, 2016

Do Not Publish