Mark Gibson Dudley v. State
03-15-00641-CR
| Tex. App. | Aug 12, 2016Background
- Dudley pleaded guilty to indecency with a child (Tex. Penal Code §21.11) under a plea bargain that deferred adjudication and provided for 10 years’ community supervision with the State recommending deferral.
- The trial court accepted the plea, deferred adjudication, and placed Dudley on community supervision.
- A few months later the State moved to adjudicate guilt and revoke supervision.
- At the adjudication/revocation hearing the court found Dudley violated supervision, adjudicated him guilty, and sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment (second-degree felony range).
- Court-appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief seeking to withdraw, asserting the appeal was frivolous; counsel informed Dudley of his appellate rights and provided materials for pro se review; Dudley did not file a pro se brief or request the record.
- The Court of Appeals conducted an independent review, found no arguable grounds, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirmed the judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there are arguable grounds for appeal after an Anders brief | State argued proceedings and adjudication were proper (implicit) | Dudley’s counsel asserted no non-frivolous issues exist; Dudley filed no pro se issues | Court found no arguable grounds and affirmed judgment |
| Whether counsel complied with Anders/Garner procedures | State not directly contesting compliance | Counsel asserted compliance with Anders and Kelly notice requirements | Court found counsel met Anders/Garner/Kelly requirements |
| Whether appellant was entitled to appointment of substitute counsel for PDR | State: no substitute required | Counsel moved to withdraw; no request for substitute made | Court held no substitute counsel will be appointed; appellant may retain counsel or proceed pro se for PDR |
| Whether record review reveals reversible error in adjudication/revocation | State argued revocation and adjudication were supported by record (implicit) | Counsel found no reversible error after review | Court’s independent review found nothing to support appeal; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (establishes counsel’s duty to file brief showing case is frivolous to withdraw)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (explains purpose of Anders briefs and appellate review)
- Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (Anders procedures in Texas)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (requirements for informing appellant and providing access to record)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (independent appellate review when counsel files Anders brief)