Samuel Albert House v. State

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00121-CR Samuel Albert House, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 264TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 74736, HONORABLE JOHN GAUNTT, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION Samuel Albert House was charged with failing to register as a sex offender. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 62.102. After being charged, House entered a plea of guilty, and the district court deferred his adjudication and placed him on community supervision for five years. More than a year later, the State filed a motion to adjudicate alleging that House had violated several conditions of his community supervision. After convening a hearing on the motion, the district court revoked House’s community supervision, adjudicated him guilty of the charged offense, and sentenced him to five years in prison. See Tex. Penal Code § 12.34. House appeals the district court’s judgment adjudicating his guilt.

House’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Counsel’s brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See 386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967); Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs serve purpose of “assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous”). House’s counsel has represented to the Court that she provided copies of the motion and brief to House; advised House of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court; and provided House with a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record along with the mailing address of this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). House has not requested a copy of the appellate record nor filed a pro se brief.

We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the district court’s judgment adjudicating guilt.1

__________________________________________ David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Bourland, and Toth Affirmed Filed: October 24, 2018 Do Not Publish