v.
the State of Texas
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
NO. 09-23-00206-CR
KRISTOPHER REDDELL, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 356th District Court
Hardin County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 25896
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Kristopher Reddell pleaded guilty to assault. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Reddell guilty of the offense of assault, imposed a fine of $500, sentenced Reddell to five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, but then suspended the sentence and placed Reddell on community supervision for five years.
The State filed a Motion to Revoke Community Supervision. Reddell pleaded “true” to violating the terms of the community supervision order. After conducting an evidentiary hearing on the allegations that Reddell continued to use and test positive for narcotics after he was placed on community supervision, the trial court found all the allegations to be “true,” found the evidence was sufficient to establish that Reddell violated the terms of his community supervision, revoked Reddell’s community supervision, and assessed punishment at five years of confinement.
Reddell’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On February 9, 2024, we granted an extension of time for Reddell to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Reddell.
Upon receiving an Anders brief, this Court must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988) (citing Anders, 386 U.S. at 744). We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment.[1]
AFFIRMED.
JAY WRIGHT
Justice Submitted on May 22, 2024 Opinion Delivered June 5, 2024 Do Not Publish Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.