CourtListener 10848723•Christopher Davontae Bennett v. the State of Texas
Christopher Davontae Bennett v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 10848723Txctapp3Apr 24, 2026
Full text
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-25-00517-CR
Christopher Davontae Bennett, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
NO. FR75556, THE HONORABLE DEBBIE GARRETT, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Christopher Devontae Bennett entered a guilty plea to sexual assault of a child.
The trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed Bennett on community supervision for eight
years. See Tex. Penal Code § 22.011(a)(2)A). The State subsequently moved to adjudicate
Bennett’s guilt, alleging he violated terms of the community supervision order. Bennett pled true
to several alleged violations, and the trial court found those alleged violations true, adjudicated
Bennett’s guilt, and sentenced him to confinement for eighteen years in the Institutional Division
of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Bennett filed a timely notice of appeal.
Bennett’s court-appointed attorney on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw supported by an
Anders brief contending that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California,
386 U.S. 738, 744-45 (1967). Bennett’s court-appointed attorney’s brief meets the requirements
of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are
no arguable grounds to be advanced. See id.; Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 81-82 (1988) (explaining that Anders briefs
serve purpose of “assisting the court in determining both that counsel in fact conducted the
required detailed review of the case and that the appeal is . . . frivolous”). Bennett’s counsel has
represented to the Court that he provided copies of the motion and brief to Bennett; advised
Bennett of his right to examine the appellate record, file a pro se brief, and pursue discretionary
review following the resolution of the appeal in this Court. He also provided to Bennett a
Motion for Pro Se Access to the Appellate Record lacking only Bennett’s signature and the date
and provided the mailing address for this Court. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20
(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Bennett has not filed a pro se brief nor a motion for extension of time
to file a brief.
We have independently reviewed the record and have found nothing that might
arguably support the appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766. We
agree with counsel that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We grant counsel’s motion to
withdraw and affirm the trial court’s order.
__________________________________________
Chari L. Kelly, Justice
Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Theofanis
Affirmed
Filed: April 24, 2026
Do Not Publish
2
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.