Kamal Samari v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 291st District Court of Dallas County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-97-072-CR

No. 10-97-073-CR

No. 10-97-074-CR

KAMAL SAMARI,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 291st District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. F95-32323-WU, F96-29306-KU & F96-47184-TU

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Kamal Samari pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault in Cause No. F95-32323-WU and felony theft in Cause No. F96-29306-KU. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. 22.021(a)(1)(B)(i), (2)(B), 31.03(e)(4)(A) (Vernon 1994 & Supp. 1997). In exchange for these pleas, the State recommended deferred adjudication community supervision in the aggravated sexual assault case and community supervision in the theft case. The court sentenced Samari in accordance with the State's recommendations.

Two months later, Samari committed the offense of robbery. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. 29.02(a)(2) (Vernon 1994). The State indicted Samari for this offense under Cause No. F96-47184-TU and filed motions to adjudicate Samari's deferred adjudication and to revoke his community service supervision. Samari pleaded guilty to the subsequent offense and true to the State's motions. The court followed the State's plea recommendations and sentenced Samari to five years' confinement in the Institution Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for the aggravated sexual assault and robbery charges and two years' confinement in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for the theft charge. Samari's appointed attorney filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw on April 23, 1997. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). On April 30, we granted the attorney's motion to withdraw, finding that the appeal was without merit. See Johnson v. State, 885 S.W.2d 641 (Tex. App. Waco 1994, pet. ref'd). Samari has not filed a pro-se brief or a request for an extension of time to file his brief. Id. at 647 & n.3. Thus, because we have no viable points of error to consider, the judgment is affirmed. Tex. R. App. P. 81(b)(2), 90(a).

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis

Justice Cummings and

Justice Vance

Affirmed

Opinion issued and filed July 23, 1997

Do not publish