Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-24-00437-CR Levi A. BRAGDON, Jr., Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 218th Judicial District Court, Wilson County, Texas Trial Court No. CRW2109190 Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Adrian A. Spears II, Justice Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice Irene Rios, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice Delivered and Filed: June 18, 2025 AFFIRMED On August 22, 2022, Levi A. Bragdon, Jr. pled no contest to possession of a controlled substance less than one gram. He was sentenced to two years in state jail, his sentence was suspended, and he was placed on community supervision for three years. On October 17, 2023, the State filed a first amended motion to revoke Bragdon’s community supervision. At the revocation hearing, Bragdon pled “not true” to all the allegations in the revocation motion. After hearing testimony, the trial court found allegations 10A, 10B, 10C, 11, and 17 to be true. The trial 04-24-00437-CR

court revoked Bragdon’s community supervision and sentenced him to eighteen months in state jail. Bragdon filed a motion for new trial, which was overruled by operation of law. He then filed a notice of appeal.

Bragdon’s court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief and motion to withdraw in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). With citations to the record and legal authority, counsel’s brief explains why no arguable points of error exist for review and concludes that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. See id. at 744-45; High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation showing why there is no basis to advance an appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744-45; High, 573 S.W.2d at 812-13. In compliance with the requirements of Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014), counsel has certified that he served copies of the brief and motion to withdraw on Bragdon, has informed Bragdon of his right to review the record and file a pro se brief, and has explained to Bragdon the procedure for obtaining the record. This court subsequently set a deadline for Bragdon to request a copy of the record and file a pro se brief. Bragdon did not request a copy of the record nor did he file a pro se brief.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. We find no arguable grounds for appeal exist and agree with counsel that this appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Furthermore, we grant the motion to withdraw. 1 See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 0F

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should appellant wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, he must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the later of (1) the date of this opinion; or (2) the date the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review should comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.4.

-2- 04-24-00437-CR

85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

Adrian A. Spears II, Justice DO NOT PUBLISH

-3-