Christopher Paul Richard 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. 09-21-00013-CR __________________ CHRISTOPHER PAUL RICHARD, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the Criminal District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 14-20372 __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In an open plea, appellant Christopher Paul Richard pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance. See Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 485.115(a), (b). The trial court found Richard guilty and assessed punishment at two years in state jail, then suspended imposition of sentence, placed Richard on community supervision for five years, and assessed a $500 fine. Subsequently, the State filed a motion to revoke Richard’s community supervision. Richard pleaded “true” to violating one term of the community supervision order. After conducting 1 an evidentiary hearing, the trial court found that Richard violated the terms of his community supervision, revoked Richard’s community supervision, and imposed a sentence of twenty months of confinement. Richard’s appellate counsel filed an Anders brief that presents counsel’s professional evaluation of the record and concludes that 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 June 25, 2021, we granted an extension of time for Richard to file a pro se brief. We received no response from Richard. We reviewed the appellate record, and we agree with counsel’s conclusion that no arguable issues support the 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. _________________________ W. SCOTT GOLEMON Chief Justice Submitted on September 28, 2021 Opinion Delivered October 6, 2021 Do Not Publish Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ. Richard may challenge our decision in this case by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.1. 2 1
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.
