In the Matter of R.D.B.--Appeal from County Court at Law No 3 of Montgomery County

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-01-178 CV
____________________
IN THE MATTER OF R.D.B., A JUVENILE
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3
Montgomery County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 5767-JV
OPINION

This is the second appeal in this case. Previously, the Texarkana Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the cause for a new hearing after determining that appellant, R.D.B., had received ineffective assistance of counsel in his transfer hearing under Section 54.11 of the Family Code. In re R.D.B., 20 S.W.3d 255,258,261(Tex. App.- Texarkana 2000, no pet.). (1) The Texarkana court concluded that trial counsel's failure to seek court-appointed assistance of a mental health professional in light of R.D.B.'s "plainly evident background of mental health problems" prejudiced R.D.B. and undermined the court's confidence in the outcome of the proceedings. Id. at 261.

On remand, a court appointed psychologist testified on appellant's behalf. The trial court, however, ordered appellant to be transferred to the custody of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, for the completion of his fifteen year sentence. After perfecting appeal, appointed counsel filed a brief asserting that the appeal is frivolous. The brief complies with the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App.1978). The brief concludes that no error that would arguably support an appeal is presented, a conclusion with which we concur.

The procedures set out in Anders and its Texas progeny apply to juvenile appeals. In re D.A.S., 973 S.W.2d 296, 299 (Tex.1998). Further, in the instant case, R.D.B., who is no longer a juvenile, was given the opportunity to file a pro se brief. As of this date, no pro se brief has been filed.

We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel's brief, and find no error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM

 

Submitted on November 20, 2002

Opinion Delivered December 5, 2002

Do Not Publish

 

Before Walker, C.J., Burgess and Gaultney, JJ.

1. The juvenile court found R.D.B. engaged in delinquent conduct by committing the felony offenses of aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, burglary of a habitation, and theft. The court then rendered a fifteen-year determinate sentence and ordered R.D.B. committed to the Texas Youth Commission, with possible transfer at age eighteen to the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. After R.D.B. attained the age of eighteen, he was returned to juvenile court for a release or transfer hearing pursuant to Tex. Fam. Code Ann. 54.11 (Vernon 2002). At this hearing, the court ordered R.D.B. transferred from the Texas Youth Commission to the Institutional Division of the TDCJ to serve the completion of his fifteen-year determinate sentence.

 

In re R.D.B., 20 S.W.3d at 256.