Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 02-27-2020
Case Style:
Stacy James Spencer v. The State of Texas
Case Number: 04-19-00268-CR
Judge: Rebeca C. Martinez
Court: Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas
Plaintiff's Attorney: Rebecca Gorham
Joe D. Gonzales
Defendant's Attorney:
Need help finding a lawyer for representation for appealing from a motion to revoke community supervision in Texas?
Call 918-582-6422. It's Free.
Description:
MoreLaw Suites
Virtual Offices of Solo Practice Lawyer Starting at $200 a Month
Office With MoreLaw Suites and Reduce Your Overhead
918-582-3993 - Info@MoreLaw.com
Appellant Stacy James Spencer pled guilty to the third-degree felony offense of assault of
a household member, which was enhanced to a second-degree felony by a prior assault conviction.
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.01(b). Spencer was sentenced on June 27, 2018, to ten years’
incarceration, which was suspended for ten years of community supervision. On September 19,
2018, the State filed a motion to revoke Spencer’s community supervision, which resulted in
Spencer’s conditions of community supervision being amended. On March 19, 2019, the State
filed a second motion to revoke Spencer’s community supervision. During a revocation hearing
held on April 18, 2019, Spencer pled “true” to violating two conditions of his community
supervision. After receiving Spencer’s sworn testimony, the trial court found the allegations that
Spencer violated conditions of his community supervision to be “true.” The trial court revoked
Spencer’s community supervision and reformed the sentence to six years’ imprisonment, crediting
Spencer for the time he served while incarcerated on the charge. Two months later, the trial court
signed a nunc pro tunc order that corrected the time credited. Spencer now appeals.
Spencer’s court-appointed attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the
record in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and a motion to withdraw.
Counsel concludes that the appeal has no merit. Counsel provided Spencer with a copy of the brief
and informed him of his right to review the record and to file his own brief. See Kelly v. State, 436
S.W.3d 313, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see also Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 83, 85–86 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1997, no pet.) (per curiam); Bruns v. State, 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex.
App.—San Antonio 1996, no pet.). Spencer thereafter filed a pro se brief. After reviewing the
record, counsel’s brief, and Spencer’s pro se brief, we conclude there is no reversible error and
agree with counsel that the appeal is wholly frivolous. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–
27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Outcome: Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed, and appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
Find a Lawyer
Find a Case
