Christopher William Mann v. State, 06-15-00163-CR

Christopher William Mann pleaded guilty and received two years deferred adjudication for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; the State later filed a motion to adjudicate alleging 14 violations.
Mann pled "true" to the violations at the adjudication hearing; the court later adjudicated guilt and sentenced him to 14 years’ imprisonment.
The district clerk issued a capias and the State filed the motion to adjudicate well before the supervision term expired.
Mann attempted to present a victim letter (admitted over hearsay objection) and later testified, denying the assault and criticizing counsel; the victim initially invoked the Fifth but ultimately testified.
Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief concluding the appeal is frivolous and certified that Mann was notified of his right to file a pro se response.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Mann)	Held
Jurisdiction to adjudicate guilt	Motion and capias were filed timely; court has subject-matter and personal jurisdiction	Mann contends timing/processing could be challenged (implicit)	Court had jurisdiction over person and subject matter; adjudication timely permitted under Art. 42.12 §5(h)
Adequacy of notice of violations	Motion to adjudicate sufficiently and clearly alleged violations; no timely objection below	Mann did not preserve a challenge to the motion’s adequacy	Motion provided constitutionally adequate notice; no preserved error
Sufficiency of evidence to revoke/adjudicate	A plea of "true" is sufficient to support revocation/adjudication; State need only prove by preponderance	Mann later recanted guilty plea and denied commission at sentencing	Plea of "true" alone supports adjudication; evidence legally sufficient to proceed
Sentence within statutory range & ineffective assistance	Court could impose any statutory sentence upon adjudication; counsel’s representation was reasonable strategy	Mann complained about sentence exceeding prosecutor’s recommendation and criticized counsel	Sentence (14 years) was within statutory limits; record does not support ineffective-assistance claim

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (framework for counsel withdrawing when appeal is frivolous)
McCoy v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429 (1988) (limits on counsel’s role in appellate advocacy)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part ineffective-assistance standard)
State v. Dunbar, 297 S.W.3d 777 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (court retains jurisdiction when motion and capias filed before supervision expiration)
LaBelle v. State, 720 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986) (revocation motion must fairly inform probationer of allegations)
Moses v. State, 590 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979) (plea of true alone can support revocation)
Von Schounmacher v. State, 5 S.W.3d 221 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (court not bound by plea agreement recommendations after adjudication)
Ex parte Broadway, 301 S.W.3d 694 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (judge may assess any statutorily permitted punishment upon adjudication)