Bronson Williams v. The State of Texas Appeal from Criminal District Court of Jefferson County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-19-00265-CR __________________ BRONSON WILLIAMS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 13-17383 __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, appellant Bronson Williams pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery. The trial court found the evidence sufficient to find Williams guilty, but deferred further proceedings, placed Williams on community supervision for ten years, and assessed a fine of $500. The State subsequently filed a motion to revoke Williams’s unadjudicated community supervision. Williams pleaded “true” to eight violations of the terms of his community supervision. The 1 trial court found that Williams had violated the conditions of his community supervision, found Williams guilty of aggravated robbery, and assessed punishment at fifty years of confinement. Williams’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 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On September 10, 2019, we granted an extension of time for Williams to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Williams. 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. Cf. Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court’s judgment. 1 AFFIRMED. ______________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on December 17, 2019 Opinion Delivered January 8, 2020 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 1 Williams may challenge our opinion in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review.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.
