Ybarra v. State, 072020 TXCA13, 13-19-00195-CR

Docket Nº:13-19-00195-CR
Opinion Judge:JAIME TIJERINA, JUSTICE
Party Name:RAVEN MARIE YBARRA, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
Judge Panel:Before Justices Hinojosa, Perkes, and Tijerina
Case Date:July 20, 2020
Court:Court of Appeals of Texas
 
FREE EXCERPT

RAVEN MARIE YBARRA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

No. 13-19-00195-CR

Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi-Edinburg

July 20, 2020

Do not publish. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).

On appeal from the 25th District Court of Gonzales County, Texas.

Before Justices Hinojosa, Perkes, and Tijerina

MEMORANDUM OPINION

JAIME TIJERINA, JUSTICE

On January 31, 2017, appellant Raven Marie Ybarra pleaded guilty to the offense of possession of a controlled substance, a state jail felony. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.115(b). The trial court placed appellant on deferred-adjudication community supervision for a period of four years. On March 14, 2018, the State filed a motion for adjudication of guilt alleging that appellant committed fifteen violations of the terms of her community supervision, including, among other things, failure to pay fees, testing positive for methamphetamines, failing to report once per month or as directed on multiple occasions, and failing to submit to a hair follicle test as requested. Appellant pleaded "true" to all fifteen allegations. The trial court accepted appellant's pleas of "true," adjudicated her guilty, and sentenced her to fifteen months' confinement. This appeal followed. Appellant's court-appointed counsel has filed an Anders brief stating that there are no arguable grounds for appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). We affirm.

I. Anders Brief

Pursuant to Anders v. California, appellant's court-appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief and a motion to withdraw with this Court, stating that his review of the record yielded no grounds of reversible error upon which an appeal can be predicated. See id. Counsel's brief meets the requirements of Anders as it presents a professional evaluation demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to advance on appeal. See In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 n.9 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding) ("In Texas, an Anders brief need not specifically advance 'arguable' points of error if counsel finds none, but it must provide record references to the facts and procedural history and set out pertinent legal authorities." (citing Hawkins v. State, 112 S.W.3d 340, 343-44 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi-Edinburg 2003, no pet.))); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).

In compliance with High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP