Ronald Goodner v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 283rd District Court of Dallas County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 08-05-00019-CR

Case Date: 08/25/2005

Plaintiff: Ronald Goodner

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 283rd District Court of Dallas County

Preview:Ronald Goodner v. The State of Texas--Appeal from
283rd District Court of Dallas County
Criminal Case Template /**/
COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
RONALD GOODNER,
Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee.
No. 08-05-00019-CR
Appeal from the
283rd District Court
of Dallas County, Texas
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/63570.html[8/20/2013 8:11:41 PM]

(TC# F-0072671-LT)
O P I N I O N
This is an appeal from a conviction for the offense of robbery. Appellant pleaded guilty and the court assessed
punishment at five years deferred adjudication. The State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt. At the hearing on the
motion to adjudicate guilt, Appellant entered a plea of true and the court adjudicated Appellant guilty of the offense of
robbery. Appellant was sentenced to five years imprisonment. We affirm.
Appellant s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief in which he has concluded that the appeal is wholly frivolous and
without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493,
reh. denied, 388 U.S. 924, 87 S.Ct. 2094, 18 L.Ed.2d 1377 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record
demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). A copy of counsel s brief has been
delivered to Appellant, and Appellant has been advised of his right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se
brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel s brief and agree that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without
merit. Further, we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. A discussion of the matters
discussed in counsel s brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
The judgment is affirmed.
RICHARD BARAJAS, Chief Justice
August 25, 2005
Before Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/63570.html[8/20/2013 8:11:41 PM]

Download 63570.pdf