Devon Latrael Flye v. the State of Texas, 11-20-00214-CR

Devon Latrael Flye pleaded guilty to state-jail felony possession of methamphetamine; plea agreement: 16 months confinement, $1,500 fine, $700 toward court‑appointed attorney’s fees, confinement suspended, 3 years community supervision.
State filed a motion to revoke; at a contested revocation hearing the trial court found five allegations true, revoked community supervision, and imposed the original 16‑month sentence and the remaining fines/fees.
Appellant’s appointed counsel filed an Anders/Schulman brief and a motion to withdraw, provided the record and notices to Flye; Flye did not file a pro se response.
The appellate court independently reviewed the record, found Flye admitted violations (failing to report, failing to perform community service, leaving the county), and concluded no arguable grounds for appeal existed; one violation suffices to support revocation.
The written judgment assessed $700 in attorney’s fees consisting of two $350 assessments (one from the original proceeding, one for the 2020 revocation). The trial court had found Flye indigent and appointed counsel at each stage, and the record contains no evidence she could pay fees for the revocation proceeding.
The court held the $350 fee for the 2020 revocation proceeding was improperly assessed, reformed the judgment to delete that assessment (reducing fees owed to $350), granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed as modified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Flye)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether revocation was supported by sufficient evidence	Flye argued (implicitly) that revocation lacked merit	State argued multiple supervision violations proved revocation	Court held violations (admitted by Flye) supported revocation; one violation is sufficient
Whether appellate counsel properly moved to withdraw under Anders	Flye contested nothing on record	State supported counsel’s compliance with Anders/Schulman/Kelly	Court held counsel complied with procedural requirements and granted withdrawal
Whether issues from the original plea can be raised on revocation appeal	Flye attempted to challenge original proceedings (implied)	State argued original‑plea issues are not reviewable on revocation appeal	Court held such challenges are barred absent a void judgment (Jordan/Manuel)
Whether court‑appointed attorney’s fees for the revocation proceeding may be assessed	Flye argued she is indigent and cannot be charged for revocation counsel	State argued $700 in fees (including $350 for revocation) were owing under the judgment	Court held the $350 fee for the 2020 revocation proceeding was improperly assessed and deleted it (Mayer); retained $350 from original plea bargain (Riles)

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (standards for counsel to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (procedures for Anders‑style appellate briefs in Texas)
Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (guidance on appellate counsel’s duties in Anders proceedings)
Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (court‑appointed attorney’s fees cannot be assessed absent proof the defendant can pay)
Smith v. State, 286 S.W.3d 333 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (a single proven supervision violation suffices to revoke community supervision)
Jordan v. State, 54 S.W.3d 783 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (issues from the original plea generally cannot be raised on revocation appeal)
Riles v. State, 452 S.W.3d 333 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (a defendant may waive challenge to fees assessed as part of an initial plea bargain)