Nicole Rae Ashworth v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 175th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

Annotate this Case
No. 04-07-00725-CR
Nicole Rae ASHWORTH,
The STATE of Texas,
From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2006-CR-9342
Honorable Mary Roman, Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Steven C. Hilbig, Justice


Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice


Delivered and Filed: May 28, 2008



Nicole Rae Ashworth pled guilty to theft and was sentenced to two years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - State Jail Division and a $1,500.00 fine. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court suspended the sentence of confinement and placed Ashworth on community supervision for two years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke, and Ashworth pled true to the allegation she committed two assaults in violation of the conditions of her probation. Based on Ashworth's plea of true, the trial court revoked her community supervision and imposed the terms of the original sentence. Ashworth timely filed a notice of appeal.

Ashworth's court-appointed appellate attorney filed a motion to withdraw and a brief in which she raises no arguable points of error and concludes the appeal is 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 (1967), High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Ashworth's counsel has certified that Ashworth was provided a copy of the brief and motion to withdraw and was informed of her right to review the record and file her own brief. Ashworth has not done so.

After reviewing the record and counsel's brief, we find no reversible error and agree with counsel the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We therefore grant the motion to withdraw filed by Ashworth's counsel and affirm the trial court's judgment. See id.; Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.-San Antonio 1996, no pet.).

No substitute counsel will be appointed. Should Ashworth wish to seek further review of this case by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, she must either retain an attorney to file a petition for discretionary review or file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed within thirty days from the date of either this opinion or the last timely motion for rehearing that is overruled by this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2. Any petition for discretionary review must be filed with this court, after which it will be forwarded to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals along with the rest of the filings in this case. See id. R. 68.3. Any petition for discretionary review must comply with the requirements of Rule 68.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. R. 68.4.

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Do not publish