Christopher Aaron Dillard v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 143rd District Court of Ward County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS § CHRISTOPHER AARON DILLARD, No. 08-10-00055-CR § Appellant, Appeal from § v. 143rd District Court § THE STATE OF TEXAS, of Ward County, Texas § Appellee. (TC # 07-02-04823-CRW) § MEMORANDUM OPINION Christopher Aaron Dillard appeals from a judgment revoking community supervision. We affirm. On April 20, 2007, Appellant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to possession of less than one gram of cocaine. The trial court, in accordance with the plea bargain, assessed Appellant s punishment at imprisonment for two years in the state jail but suspended the sentence and placed Appellant on community supervision for five years. The State filed a motion to revoke alleging multiple violations of the terms and conditions of community supervision. Appellant entered a plea of true to paragraphs two and three of the motion to revoke but he contested the remaining allegations. The trial court entered a finding of true as to paragraphs two, three, and six, revoked Appellant s community supervision, and imposed the original sentence of imprisonment in the state jail for two years. Appellant s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377, 87 S.Ct. 2094 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex.Crim.App. 1969). A copy of counsel s brief has been delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se brief. Appellant has not filed a brief. We have carefully reviewed the record and the brief of counsel, and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. March 23, 2011 ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Rivera, JJ. (Do Not Publish)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
