Bradley Rosser v. the State of Texas
07-20-00113-CR
| Tex. App. | Jul 14, 2021Background
- Bradley Rosser was charged with assault on a family member by impeding breathing/circulation, with an alleged enhancement based on a prior family-assault conviction.
- Rosser pleaded guilty under a plea bargain: the State dropped the enhancement and recommended two years’ deferred adjudication community supervision; the trial court accepted the agreement.
- While on deferred supervision, the State filed a motion to proceed to adjudication, alleging Rosser possessed methamphetamine; Rosser pled "true" to the violation without a new plea bargain.
- The trial court accepted the plea, adjudicated Rosser guilty, and sentenced him to five years’ confinement.
- On appeal, appointed counsel filed a motion to withdraw supported by an Anders brief, certifying no reversible error; Rosser was notified and did not file a pro se response.
- The court performed an independent review of the record, found no non-frivolous issues, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed the trial-court judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adjudication after plea of "true" to community-supervision violation | Adjudication was proper because Rosser pled true and evidence supported the violation | No preserved appellate complaint contesting the adjudication; counsel found no reversible error | Court affirmed adjudication and sentence |
| Whether appellate counsel properly sought to withdraw under Anders | Counsel contends thorough review shows no reversible error and move to withdraw is appropriate | Rosser received notice and did not file a pro se response disputing counsel’s conclusion | Court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw after independent review |
| Compliance with procedural duties when filing Anders brief (notice, record access) | Counsel and the court assert compliance with High and Kelly requirements (notice, provision of documents, opportunity to respond) | Rosser did not claim noncompliance or file a pro se response | Court found procedural obligations satisfied and proceeded to review and affirm |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (establishes procedure for appointed counsel to move to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (court must independently review record when counsel claims appeal is frivolous)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (Texas standards for Anders brief and counsel withdrawal)
- High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978) (procedural duties of counsel when seeking to withdraw)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (details appointed counsel's obligations on filing Anders brief)
- Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969) (precedent on appellate-review obligations when counsel withdraws)