GILBERT v. STATE, 09-02-087-CR (Tex.App.-Beaumont [9th Dist.] 2003)

EARL JEROME GILBERT, SR., Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

No. 09-02-087-CR.Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont.
Submitted on January 2, 2003. Opinion Delivered January 15, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Appeal from the 252nd District Court, Jefferson County, Texas, Trial Cause No. 80892.

AFFIRMED.

Before McKEITHEN, C.J., BURGESS and GAULTNEY, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM

Earl Jerome Gilbert, Sr., entered a guilty plea in Cause No. 80892 to the second degree felony offense of sexual assault on a child. Tex. Pen. Code Ann. § 22.011 (a)(2)(A) (Vernon Supp. 2003). Following a plea bargain agreement between Gilbert and the State, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt, then placed Gilbert on community supervision for ten years and fined him $1000. In a subsequent hearing, the trial court found that Gilbert violated the terms of the community supervision order by failing to work faithfully at suitable employment and failing to complete the sex offender treatment program as ordered by the court. The trial court assessed punishment at ten years of confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division.

Appellate counsel filed a brief that concludes no arguable error is presented in this appeal. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807
(Tex.Crim.App. 1978). On August 29, 2002, we granted Gilbert an extension of time in which to file a pro se brief. We received no response from the appellant. Because the appeal involves the application of well-settled principles of law, we deliver this memorandum opinion. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

The notice of appeal filed by Gilbert failed to invoke our appellate jurisdiction to review issues relating to his conviction. White v. State, 61 S.W.3d 424, 428-29 (Tex.Crim. App. 2001).[1] Although a general notice of appeal invokes our jurisdiction to consider issues relating to the process by which Gilbert was punished, no error relating to punishment was preserved. Vidaurri v. State, 49 S.W.3d 880, 883, 885 (Tex.Crim. App. 2001).

We have reviewed the clerk’s record and the reporter’s record, and find no arguable error requiring us to order appointment of new counsel Compare Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991).

[1] In a plea-bargained, felony case, the notice of appeal must specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3).