Mary Genevive Bond v. The State of Texas

No. 09-25-00482-CR · Court of Appeals for the Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont · May 27, 2026 · No. 09-25-00482-CR

Summary

The Ninth Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the revocation of Mary Genevive Bond’s community supervision and her resulting two-year state-jail sentence for fraudulent use of identifying information. In an Anders appeal, the court independently reviewed the record and counsel’s brief, found no arguable grounds for reversal, and concluded that the appeal was frivolous.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
Writing for the Court
Jay Wright; Golemon, C.J.; Johnson, J.; Wright, J.
Jurisdiction
Court of Appeals for the Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
Decision date
May 27, 2026
Docket number
09-25-00482-CR
Procedural posture
Appeal from the revocation of community supervision following Bond's guilty plea and her plea of true to violations of the conditions of community supervision; appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief asserting that the appeal was frivolous.
Standard of review
Upon receipt of an Anders brief, the court of appeals must conduct a full examination of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous.
Precedential value
Unpublished memorandum opinion; the opinion states 'Do Not Publish.'
Parties
Mary Genevive Bond v. The State of Texas
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

appellate procedurecriminal procedureprobationright to counsel

Practice areas

criminal appellate practicecommunity supervision revocationAnders appeals

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appeal presented any arguably meritorious issue requiring reversal after appellate counsel filed an Anders brief.
  2. Whether the court was required to appoint new appellate counsel to re-brief the appeal.

Holdings

  1. After reviewing the entire record and counsel's Anders brief, the court found nothing that arguably would support the appeal and determined that the appeal was wholly frivolous.
  2. The court found it unnecessary to order the appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeal.

Key quotations

Upon receiving an Anders brief, this Court must conduct a full examination of all the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. (at 2)
We have reviewed the entire record and counsel’s brief, and we have found nothing that arguably would support the appeal. (at 2)

Factual background

Bond pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain to the state jail felony offense of fraudulent use of identifying information. The trial court found her guilty, assessed two years in state jail, ordered restitution, suspended the confinement portion of the sentence, and placed her on five years of community supervision subject to express conditions. Before the supervision term expired, the State sought revocation; Bond pleaded true to certain violations, and the trial court revoked community supervision and imposed the two-year state-jail sentence.

Procedural history

Bond pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain to fraudulent use of identifying information. The trial court assessed two years in state jail, suspended the confinement portion, and placed her on community supervision for five years. After the State filed motions to revoke, Bond pleaded true to specified violations, the trial court revoked community supervision and sentenced her to two years in state jail, and Bond appealed. Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief; Bond was notified of her right to file a pro se brief but did not respond. The court of appeals independently reviewed the record and affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…