Smith, Joel Lynn v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 282nd District Court of Dallas County

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

)

JOEL LYNN SMITH, ) No. 08-02-00033-CR

)

Appellant, ) Appeal from

)

v. ) 282nd District Court

)

THE STATE OF TEXAS, ) of Dallas County, Texas

)

Appellee. ) (TC# F-9952898-S)

O P I N I O N

Joel Lynn Smith appeals his conviction for unlawful possession of cocaine. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial and entered a negotiated plea of guilty. The trial court found Appellant guilty, and pursuant to the plea bargain, deferred an adjudication of guilt. The court placed Appellant on community supervision for a term of three years and imposed a $500 fine. The court subsequently adjudicated Appellant guilty and assessed punishment at a fine of $340.25 and confinement in the state jail for eighteen months. We affirm.

Appellant=s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which she 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, 87 S. Ct. 2094, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1377 (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. No pro se brief has been filed.

A defendant placed on deferred adjudication community supervision may raise issues relating to the original plea proceeding only in appeals taken when deferred adjudication community supervision is first imposed. See Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661-62 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999). Because Appellant did not pursue such an appeal, he is not permitted to raise any issues related to his original guilty plea in this proceeding. Further, Appellant is not permitted to appeal any matters related to the trial court=s determination to proceed with an adjudication of guilt. See Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 42.12, ' 5(b)(Vernon Supp. 2002). We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief, 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 is affirmed.

October 24, 2002

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Justice

Before Panel No. 1

Larsen, McClure, and Chew, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)