Tatiana Leonard v. the State of Texas
13-20-00411-CR
Tex. App.Mar 31, 2022Background
- Tatiana Leonard pleaded guilty to continuous family-violence (third-degree felony) and received deferred adjudication (community supervision).
- The State filed a motion to revoke probation; at the revocation/adjudication hearing Leonard pleaded not true to two allegations and true to four.
- The trial court found all allegations true, revoked community supervision, adjudicated guilt, and sentenced Leonard to two years in TDCJ.
- Court‑appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, stating no arguable grounds for appeal and certifying he complied with Texas Anders practice requirements and notified Leonard of her rights.
- The court of appeals conducted an independent review of the record, found no reversible error, granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, affirmed the judgment, and ordered counsel to notify Leonard of her right to seek discretionary review (no substitute counsel appointed).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of revocation/adjudication | Leonard challenged nothing on appeal; implicit claim that proceedings might be erroneous | State relied on trial court findings and record supporting revocation and adjudication | No reversible error; judgment affirmed |
| Adequacy of appellate representation (Anders brief) | Counsel asserted he found no meritorious issues and complied with Anders/Schulman requirements | State had no contrary claim; record supports counsel’s compliance | Court found the Anders brief adequate under Texas standards |
| Requirement of independent appellate review | Leonard did not file pro se response; implied need for full record review | State: appellate court must still review entire record when Anders brief filed | Court performed full review (Penson requirement) and found no reversible error |
| Counsel’s motion to withdraw and client notification | Leonard must be informed of rights to seek discretionary review and access record | State: counsel may withdraw if court finds Anders compliance; no substitute counsel required | Motion to withdraw granted; counsel ordered to send opinion and advise Leonard of PDR rights; no substitute counsel appointed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (framework for counsel to withdraw when no meritorious appeal exists and requirement to notify client)
- Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988) (appellate courts must conduct full independent review when counsel files an Anders brief)
- In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (Texas guidance on contents and procedure for Anders-style briefs)
- Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (procedural standards and counsel duties in Anders contexts in Texas)
- Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (noting appellate opinion’s statement of record review satisfies Rule of Appellate Procedure requirements)