Dekovan Alumjuan Hall v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 420th District of Nacogdoches County

Opinion filed March 8, 2007

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

____________

   No. 11-06-00280-CR

__________

   DEKOVAN ALUMJUAN HALL, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 420th District Court

Nacogdoches County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F 139252006

O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a judgment adjudicating guilt. Dekovan Alumjuan Hall originally entered a plea of guilty to the offense of possession of cocaine. Pursuant to the plea bargain agreement, the trial court deferred the adjudication of guilt, placed appellant on community supervision for three years, and assessed a $2,500 fine. After a hearing on the State=s motion to adjudicate, the trial court found that appellant had violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision, revoked his community supervision, adjudicated his guilt, and imposed a sentence of confinement for eight years. We affirm.

Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the record and applicable law and states that she has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel has provided appellant with a copy of the brief and advised appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel=s brief. A response has not been filed. Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969); Eaden v. State, 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.CEastland 2005, no pet.).

Following the procedures outlined in Anders, we have independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit. We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Ex parte Owens, 206 S.W.3d 670 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Likewise, this court advises appellant that he may file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 66. Black v. State, No. 11-06-00273-CR, 2007 WL 431005 (Tex. App.CEastland, Feb. 8, 2007, no pet. h.).

The motion to withdraw is granted, and the judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

March 8, 2007

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

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.