Robert Grimes v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 252nd District Court of Jefferson County (majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-11-00161-CR _________________ ROBERT GRIMES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 09-06105 ________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant Robert Grimes pled guilty to the offense of tampering with a governmental record. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Grimes guilty, but deferred finding him guilty, and placed him on community supervision for ten years. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Grimes s unadjudicated community supervision. Grimes pled true to three violations of the terms of his community supervision. The trial court found that Grimes violated the terms of the community supervision order, found Grimes guilty of tampering with a 1 governmental record, found the enhancement provisions true, revoked Grimes s community supervision, and imposed a sentence of forty years of confinement. Grimes s appellate counsel filed a brief that presents counsel s professional evaluation of the record and concludes the appeal is frivolous. See 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). On June 9, 2011, we granted an extension of time for appellant to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant. We have reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel s conclusion that no arguable issues support an appeal. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal. Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court s judgment.1 AFFIRMED. ___________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice Submitted on September 28, 2011 Opinion Delivered October 5, 2011 Do not publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 1 Appellant may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
