Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto
Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Venson Todd Tucker v. The State of Texas
Case Number: 12-18-00250-CR
Judge: By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
Court: COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS
Plaintiff's Attorney: Mr. Michael J. West
Defendant's Attorney: Mr. James W. Huggler Jr.
Appellant was charged by indictment with assault-family violence by impeding breath or circulation. Appellant pleaded “guilty” to the charge without an agreement as to punishment. Following evidence and argument, the trial court found Appellant “guilty” and sentenced him to ten years confinement. This appeal followed.
ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO ANDERS V. CALIFORNIA Appellant’s counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California and Gainous v. State. Appellant’s counsel states that he diligently reviewed the appellate record and is of the opinion that the record reflects no reversible error and that there is no error upon which an appeal can be predicated. He further relates that he is well acquainted with the facts in this case. In compliance with Anders, Gainous, and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel
Op.] 1978), Appellant’s brief presents a chronological summation of the procedural history of the case and further states that Appellant’s counsel is unable to raise any arguable issues for appeal.1 We have likewise reviewed the record for reversible error and have found none.
Outcome: As required by Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), Appellant’s counsel moved for leave to withdraw. See also In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403, 407 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (orig. proceeding). We carried the motion for consideration with the merits. Having done so and finding no reversible error, Appellant’s counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is hereby granted and the appeal is affirmed.