Chad Eugene Appleton v. State, No. 05-13-01246-CR (Tex. App.—Dallas June 18, 2014). · Go Syfert
Chad Eugene Appleton v. State, No. 05-13-01246-CR (Tex. App.—Dallas June 18, 2014). Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Chad Eugene Appleton
v.
State
05-13-01246-CR.
Court of Appeals of Texas.
Jun 18, 2014.
Unpublished opinion
Published
AFFIRMED; Opinion Filed June 18, 2014.

In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-13-01245-CR
No. 05-13-01246-CR

CHAD EUGENE APPLETON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 196th Judicial District Court
Hunt County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 28,881 and 28,882

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Moseley, O’Neill, and FitzGerald

Opinion by Justice Moseley

Chad Eugene Appleton waived a jury and pleaded guilty to theft of property valued at

$1,500 or more but less than $20,000 and evading arrest or detention while using a vehicle. See

TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 31.03(a), (e)(4)(A), 38.04(a), (b)(2)(A) (West Supp. 2013). The trial court assessed punishment at eighteen months’ confinement in a state jail on the theft conviction.

The trial court assessed punishment, enhanced by two prior felony convictions, at thirty-five years’ imprisonment on the evading arrest conviction. On appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeals are wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of his right to file a pro se response, but he did not file a pro se response.

We have reviewed the records and counsel’s brief. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate court’s duty in Anders cases). We agree the appeals are frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the records that might arguably support the appeals.

We affirm the trial court’s judgments.

____________________________ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 131245F.U05 Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

CHAD EUGENE APPLETON, Appellant Appeal from the 196th Judicial District

Court of Hunt County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. No. 05-13-01245-CR V. 28,881).

Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices O’Neill and FitzGerald participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered June 18, 2014.

/ Jim Moseley/ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

CHAD EUGENE APPLETON, Appellant Appeal from the 196th Judicial District

Court of Hunt County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. No. 05-13-01246-CR V. 28,882).

Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices O’Neill and FitzGerald participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered June 18, 2014.

/ Jim Moseley/ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE