JAQUARIUS JOHNSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
No. 06-20-00136-CR
Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
July 14, 2021
On Appeal from the 354th District Court, Hunt County, Texas. Trial Court No. 32991CR. Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
When Jaquarius Johnson was just three months into a five-year term of deferred adjudication community supervision for abandoning or endangering a child, a state jail felony, the State moved to revoke Johnson‘s community supervision and proceed with an adjudication of his guilt. See
Johnson‘s attorney has filed a brief stating that he has reviewed the record and has found no genuinely arguable issues that could be raised on appeal. The brief sets out the procedural history of the case and summarizes the evidence elicited during the trial court proceedings. Since counsel has provided a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced, counsel has met the requirements of Anders v. California. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 743-44 (1967); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 406 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 812-13 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel also filed a motion with this Court seeking to withdraw as counsel in this appeal.
We have determined that this appeal is wholly frivolous. We have independently reviewed the entire appellate record and Johnson‘s pro se brief and, like counsel, have determined that no arguable issue supports an appeal. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the Anders context, once we determine that the appeal is without merit, we must affirm the trial court‘s judgment. Id.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.2
Josh R. Morriss, III
Chief Justice
Date Submitted: June 9, 2021
Date Decided: July 14, 2021
Do Not Publish
