In the Interest of N. H., B. H., J. H., P. H., E. C., and A. D. C., Minor Children--Appeal from 402nd Judicial District Court of Wood County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 06-03-00047-CV

Case Date: 12/02/2003

Plaintiff: Steve Nelson

Defendant: City of Crockett--Appeal from of County

Preview:Christopher Yaites v. The State of Texas--Appeal from
Crim Dist Ct 3 of Tarrant County
IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-05-00074-CR
Christopher Yaites,
Appellant
v.
The State of Texas,
Appellee
From the Criminal District Court No. 3
Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 0912020D
MEMORANDUM Opinion
Christopher Yaites pleaded guilty to the offense of aggravated robbery without the benefit of a plea agreement. The
court assessed Yaites s punishment at forty-five years imprisonment. Yaites s counsel filed an Anders brief contending
that this appeal presents no issues of arguable merit. Yaites has not filed a pro se brief or other response, though he
was notified of his right to do so. Because our independent review of the record reveals no issues of arguable merit, we
will affirm the judgment.
The documents Yaites signed in connection with his guilty plea provided him the admonishments required by law. See
Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 1.14 (Vernon 2005), art. 26.13 (Vernon Supp. 2005). The court reviewed these
admonishments on the record with Yaites, though not in the same level of detail. Yaites waived his right to a jury trial
in writing. Id. art. 1.15 (Vernon 2005). Yaites signed a judicial confession and admitted in his testimony that he
committed the offense alleged. See Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343, 353 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979);
Ramirez v. State, 139 S.W.3d 731, 732-33 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 2004, pet. ref d).
Yaites s trial counsel presented appropriate evidence and argument for the court to consider in mitigation of
punishment. Yaites s appellate counsel notes that Yaites failed to preserve any complaint that his sentence constitutes
cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. See Steadman v. State, 160 S.W.3d 582, 586
(Tex. App. Waco 2005, pet. ref d).
Our independent review of the record has revealed no issues of arguable merit. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
Counsel must advise Yaites of our decision and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review. See Sowels v.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/6988.html[8/20/2013 7:22:15 PM]

State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 694 (Tex. App. Waco 2001, no pet.).
FELIPE REYNA
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Vance, and
Justice Reyna
Affirmed
Opinion delivered and filed November 9, 2005
Do not publish
[CRPM]
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/6988.html[8/20/2013 7:22:15 PM]

Download 6988.pdf