### Court of

## Appeals Cause 

### Numbers 

### 01-15-00484—CR, 01-15—00485-CR Trial Court Cause 

### Numbers 

### 1432555, 1432805
IN THE 

### COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 

### FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT 

### HOUSTON

Christian 

## Avery Norris



### Defendant, 

## Appellant
VS. State 

### of Texas 

### Petitioner,

## Appellee

ON APPEAL 

### FROM THE 

### DISTRICT COURT

HARRIS 

### COUNTY,TEXAS 

## 230"‘ JUDICIAL DISTRICT
BRIEF 

### OF APPELLANT 

## Syngman Stevens Jr 200 HWY 90-A Ste B 

### Richmond, Texas 77469 

### SBOT: 24043219 281-630-9421 281-344-0105 ORAL 

### ARGUMENT WAIVED ACCEPTED 01-15-00484-CR FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 9/8/2015 3:30:00 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

### DESIGNATION OF PARTIES

APPELLANT

.................................. 

### ..CHRISTIAN AVERY

### NORRIS APPELLEE

........................................ ..THE STATE 

### OF TEXAS APPELLANT’S TRIALATTORNEY............TERRANCEGAISER STATE’STRIAL ATTORNEY

..................ALAN OTTO 

### STATE’SATTORNEYON APPEAL

........ ..ALAN CURRY 

### DISTRICTATTORNEY

........................ ..DEVON ANDERSON APPELLANT’S ATTORNEYON APPEAL...SYNGMAN STEVENSJR 200 HWY 90-A STE B 

### RICHMOND, TEXAS 77469TABLE OF 

### CONTENTS

DESIGNATION OF PARTIES

........................................... ..i TABLE OF 

### CONTENTS

.................................................. 

### ..ii TABLE OF 

### AUTHORITIES

............................................. 

### ..iii STATEMENTOF 

### JURISDICTION

..................................... ..Vi STATEMENT

### OF ISSUES PRESENTED 

### FOR REVIEW

............Vi 

### STATEMENTOF CASE

................................................. ..1 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

........................................... ..4 ARGUMENT

............................................................... ..4 PRAYERFOR RELIEF

................................................. . 14 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

.......................................... ..15TABLE 

### OF 

### AUTHORITIES

Constitutional Provisions U.S. Const. 

### amend. VI Tex. Const. art. 1 

### § 6 Tex. Const. art. 1 

### § 14 Statutes TX. 

### CRIM. PRO. Art 42.12 Cases 

## Boyd V. 

### State, 811 

### S.W.2d 105 

## (Tex. Cri. 

## App. 

## 1991) Craig V. 

### State, 847 

### S.W.2d 434 

## (Tex.

## App.———E1 Paso 

### 1993, no 

## pet.) Ex Parte 

### Felton, 815 

### s.W.2d 733 

## (Tex. Crim. 

### App. 

## 1991) Ex Parte 

## Gallegos. 511 

### S.W.2d 510 

## (Tex.Cr.App. 1974). Ex Parte 

## Duffy, 607 

### S.W.2d 507 

## (Tex.Cr.App.. 1980) 

## Duffy, 607 

### S.W.2d at 

### 513-516, 527 

### Glover V. 

### United 

### States, 531 

### US 198 

### Gonzalez V. 

### State, 8 

### S.W.3d 

### 640, 643 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App. 2000) Hernandez, V. 

### State 988 

### S.W.2d 770 

## (1999) Milburn V. 

### State 16 

### S.W.3d 267 

## (2000) Moore V. State 983 S.W.2D 

### 15, 2 

### (TEX. APP. 

## 1998)

iii

### Pickens V. 

### Lockhart, 714 

### F.2d 

### 1455, 1467 

# (8th Cir. 

## 1983)

Recer V. 

### State 815 

### s.W.2d 730 

## (1991) Robinson v. 

### State 16 

### S.W.3d 808 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App-2000) Shanklin V. State 190 

### S.W.3d 154 

## (Tex.App.-Hoston

## [1stDist.] 2005) 

## Spriggs V. 

### Collins, 993 F .2d 85 

# (5th Cir. 

## 1993) Strickland V. 

## Washington, 466 U.S. 

### 668, 104 S.Ct. 

### 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 

## (1984) Thomas V. 

### State, 550 

### S.W.2d 

### 64, 68 

## (Tex.Cr.App.1977) Ware V. 

### State, 875 

### S.W.2d 432 

## (Tex.App.—Waco1194, pet. 

## Refd). Williams V. 

## Taylor, 529 US 362

— 

## Supreme Court 2000 Vela V. 

### Estelle, 708 F .2d at 954

ivSTATEMENTOF 

### JURISDICTION

This court 

### has

## jurisdiction ofthis

## appeal pursuant to Tex. 

### Const. art. V 

### §6 as an 

## appeal from the decision ofthe 23

## 0”‘ District 

### Court, Harris 

## County, Texas.
STATEMENTOF ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether 

### defendant was afforded 

## reasonablyeffective assistance 

### of counsel as 

## proscribedby the sixth 

### amendment of

### the United States Constitution?

### STATEMENTOF THE 

### CASE

a. Course 

### of 

## Proceeding On 

### December 

### 1, 2014 in cause 

### numbers 1432555 and 1432805 the defendant waived trial 

## by

## jury and 

## plead guiltywithout an 

## agreed recommendationto the trial court. On 

## April29, 2015 

## during the 

### defendant’s 

## punishment hearing, defense 

### counsel asks 

### the trial court

## judge for a 

## significant amount 

### of

## jail time, 

## although defendant is 

## eligible for deferred 

## probation. The Defendant was 

### sentenced to four years in the 

### Institutional Division ofthe Texas

### Department of 

### Criminal Justice. On 

## May 6, 2015, Defendant filed a Notice of

## Appeal ofthe convictions and sentence rendered 

## against him in trial court cause numbers 1432555 

### and 1432805 

## respectively.
b. Statement of Facts
On June 

### 20, 2014 

### Defendant, Christian 

## Avery Norris was 

### indicted in

cause 

### number 1432555 for the 

## felony charge of Assault 

## FamilyViolence

## 2nd Offender. The 

### indictment

## presented that

### before the commission 

## alleged in

cause 

### number 

### 1432555, the 

### Defendant, on 

## July 26, 

### 2015, in the 

## County Criminal Court at Law no. 

### 12, of 

### Hays 

### County, Texas in Cause No. 13-

### 0347CR, was 

### convicted of

### Assault, which was 

### committed 

## against a 

### member

of 

### the defendant s 

## family. On June 

### 23, 

### 2014, Defendant was 

## appointed counsel and the 

### trial court

## judge issued a no contact

### order, 

## prohibiting Christian Norris from 

## communicating

## directly or 

## indirectlywith

### the victim. On 

## August 8, 2014 the 

### defendant, Christian 

## Avery Norris was 

### indicted in

cause 

### number 1432805 

### for the

## felony charge of Violation of 

### Protective Order. On November

### 7, 2014 at 

### the

## comprehensive pretrial conferencethe 

## parties agreed on a trial date of December 

### 1, 2014. At the

## comprehensive pretrial conferencethe final 

## plea bargain recommendation was 

### four years in the Texas

## Department of Corrections institutional division or 

## plea to the 

## judge without an 

## agreed recommendation. R.R. 14 In both cause numbers 1432555 and 1432805 the defendants range of

## punishment was any term not

more than 10 years or less than 2 years in the 

### Institutional Division 

### of the Texas

## Department of Criminal Justice and in 

### addition, a fine not to 

### exceed 

### $10,000. On 

### November

## 11”‘ the Assistant District

## Attorney filed a 

### Notice of Intention To Use Evidence of Prior 

### Convictions and Extraneous Offenses. The known 

## prior convictions listed 

### inside of the states 

### motion included two 

### misdemeanor convictions. One 

### conviction for theft in cause 

### number 1834802 in 

### County Criminal Court At Law 5 Harris 

### county Texas and one

### conviction for Assault 

## FamilyMemberin cause 

### number l2—0347CR in



## County Criminal Court At Law 12 

### Hays 

## County Texas. On 

### December 

### 1, 2014 

### the defendant filed a sworn 

### Motion for 

## Community 

## Supervision that defendant has never 

### been convicted of a 

## felony in this or any other 

### state, and

never been 

## placed on 

## community supervision for a 

## felony offense in Texas

or any 

### other State. 

### The Motion 

### for 

## Community Supervision also 

## requested the

## presidingjudge 

## placethe defendant on 

## community supervision. On December 

### 1, 2014 in cause numbers 1432555 and 

### 1432805, the 

### defendant, waived trial 

## by

## jury and 

## plead guiltywithout an 

## agreed recommendationto 

### the trial court. The cause 

### numbers were continued to 

## April29, 2015, and after a 

## hearing, the Defendant was sentenced to four years in the Institutional 

### Division of the Texas

### Department of Criminal Justice. On 

### May 6, 

### 2015, Defendant filed a 

### Notice of

## Appeal ofthe 

### convictions and sentence 

### rendered 

## against him in these causes.

### SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT



### Defendant’s convictions for Assault 

## FamilyMemberand 

### Violation of

a 

### Protective 

### Order violate the 

### Defendants 

## right to 

### effective assistance of counsel. The Court should 

### find thatdefense 

### counsel’s 

## performance and 

## resulting 

## prejudice to the defendant was so 

## egregious as to 

## bring the outcome 

### ofthe

## proceeding into 

## question. The Court 

### should find thatbut for 

### defense counsel’s 

## unprofessional errors, 

### the result ofthe

## proceeding would have been different. 

### Thus, the Court should reverse this case 

### and remand this

case to the 

### trial court 

### for a new 

## punishment hearing.
ARGUMENT 1. AS A RESULT OF TRIAL COUNSEL’S 

### PERFORMANCE, DEFENDANT’S 

### SENTENCES FOR ASSAULT FAMILY MEMBER AND VIOLATION OF PROTECTIVEORDER ARE A 

### VIOLATION OF A THE DEFENDANT’S SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT 

### TO COUNSEL. A. 

### Standard of review 

## Althoughappellant did not raise his ineffective 

### assistance of counsel claim at 

### trial, such 

### claim may 

### be raised for the first time on 

## appeal when there is a 

### constitutional violation. The 

### defendant need not 

## object in 

### the trialto 

### counsel’s ineffective 

## representation to preserve 

### the issue for 

## appellate

review. Robinson v. State 16 

### S.W.3d 808 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App—2000) Thus is 

## clearlyapparent from the face ofthe 

### record and no 

## legitimate state 

### interest is 

### served 

## by the enforcement of 

### usual rules of

## procedural default. Gonzalez v. 

### State, 8 

### S.W.3d. 

### 640, 643 

## (Tex. 

## Crim.App 2000). B. 

### Defendant’s sentences were a 

### violation of his 

### SixthAmendment

## Right to 

### Effective Assistance of Counsel The 

### SixthAmendment

## Right to counsel includes a 

## right to counsel at 

## sentencing. The 

## right to 

### effective assistance of counsel 

### is an 

## undisputed feature ofthe 

### SixthAmendment

## right to counsel. A defendant who wishes to prove thathe received ineffective assistance of counsel must 

## satisfy two 

## requirements: first, the defendant must demonstrate thatcounsels 

## performance was 

### unreasonable under 

## prevailing

## professional

norms and he must also 

### demonstrate thatcounsels deficient

## performance resulted in 

## prejudice. Strickland v. 

## Washington, 466 

### U.S. 

### 668, 104 S.Ct. 

### 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 

## (1984) Assuming Strickland left open the

## question ofwhether a 

### defendant is 

## required to 

### show 

## prejudice from deficient 

### attorney

## performance at 

## noncapital sentencing proceedings, we 

## perceive no 

### valid reason 

## why Strickland cannot

## apply, or 

## why a 

### different rule should 

## apply, to 

## noncapital sentencing



## proceedings. Hernandez V. State 988 S.W. 2d 770 

## (1999) The 

### Strickland Standard 

## applies in 

## capital and 

## non-capital cases. 

## Boyd V. 

### State, 811 

### S.W.2d 105 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App. 1991)

To determine whether

### counsels assistance was 

## reasonably effective 

## during the

## punishmentphase of the 

### trial the 

## representation must be 

### viewed in 

### its 

## totality. Ex Parte 

## Duffy, 607 

### S.W.2d 507 

## (Tex.Cr.App.. 1980)) Each case must be 

### reviewed based upon its individual facts and 

### circumstances. Ex Parte 

## Gallegos. 511 

### S.W.2d 510 

## (Tex.Cr.App. 1974). The 

### defendant who is 

### able to demonstrate that

### counsel’s 

## performance

was deficientwill not 

## prevail on an ineffective 

### assistance claim 

### unless he

can also demonstrate 

## prejudice. The court in 

### Strickland stated the defendant
must also 

### show thatthere 

### is a 

### reasonable

## probabilitythat, but for 

### counsels 

## unprofessional errors, the result 

### ofthe

## proceeding would have been 

### different. 

## According to 

### the 

### court, a 

### reasonable

## probabilityis a 

## probability sufficient to 

### undermine confidence in the outcome. A

## judge, in the best interest 

### of

## justice, the

## public, and the 

### defendant, after conviction or a 

## plea of

## guilty or 

### nolo 

### contendere, may 

## suspend the 

## imposition ofthe sentence and 

## place the defendant on 

## community

## supervision or 

## impose a 

### fine 

## applicable to 

### the offense and 

## place the



### defendant on 

## community 

## supervision, this is 

### often referred to as 

## straight 

## probation. CCP Art. 42.12 

### § 3. CCPP Art. 42.12 

### § 

## 5(a) allows a

## judge following a 

## plea of

## guilty or nolo 

### contendere to find thatthe evidence 

### substantiates the 

### defendant’s 

## guilt, defer further

## proceedings without

## entering an 

## adjudicationof

## guilty and 

## placethe 

### defendant on 

## community supervision. The purpose 

### ofthe statute 

### is
to allow the trial court the 

## flexibility to defer 

## adjudicationfor 

## deserving defendants when in its 

## opinion the 

### best interest 

### of 

## society and the defend will be 

### served. REED v. 

### State, 644 

### S.W.2d 479 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App. 1983) If we look to the 

## proofoffered at 

## punishment to 

### determine whether Counsel failed to prove a defendant’s 

## eligibility, the answer is in the 

### affirmative. Failureto 

### offer evidence to prove 

## eligibility for 

## probation is ineffective assistance of counsel San Roman V. 

### State, 681 

### S.W.2d 872 

## (Tex. 

## App.~—El Paso 

### 1984, pet. ref’ 

## (1) Defense counsel asks the 

### defendant, 

## “[w]hat would you like the 

## Judge to 

### do?” R.R. 39 To wit the 

### Defendant

## responds, “I 

### would

## just ask the 

## Judge to 

### be lenient with me.” R.R. 40 Defense 

### Counsel passes the witness at this

## point and asks 

### defendant no 

### further

## questions during the

## hearing

## regarding probation. Defense counsel failed to 

### elicit

## testimony for the court



### thatthe Defendant was not a 

### convicted felon 

### and had never been on a 

## straight or 

### deferred 

## probation. There was no 

## question asked ofthe defendant’s 

## knowledge of

## probation conditions or if he would be 

### able to 

### abide 

## by the courts restrictions if

## placed on 

## probation. Neitherdoes the record 

### reflect defendant’s 

### desire for 

## community 

## supervision, or how a 

## felony convictionwould 

### affect his future chances at 

## employment and 

### education. 

## Testimonythat a defendant has never “been 

### convicted of any felonies 

### in this or any otherstate” 

### is sufficient to prove 

### his 

## eligibility for 

## probation because it encompasses the 

### factthathe has never 

### been 

## finallyconvicted of a 

## felony and thathe has never been 

## placed on 

## felony 

## probation. Mansfield v. 

### State, 306 

### S.W.3d 773 

## (Tex. Crim. 

## App. 2010) An 

### attorney is 

### ineffective where he 

### fails to prove a 

### defendant’s 

## eligibilityfor 

## probation where the facts show thatthe fact finder would 

### have considered it. Ware v. 

### State, 875 

### S.W.2d 432 

## (Tex.App.-Waco1194, pet. Ref

## d) Here in 

### the instant case, there is a failureto establish 

## probation eligibility. There is a 

### constitutional 

## right to 

### counsel at 

## sentencing. Glover v. 

### United 

### States, 531 US 

### 198,203 

## (2001) The 

### prosecutor and defense counsel function as advocates 

## during the 

## sentencing proceeding so thatthe

## sentencing authority will engage in a 

### balanced and 

## thorough effort to 

### determine the 

## right sentence 

### withinthe range 

### of

## prescribedpenalties. The 

## sentencing process 

### consists of

## weighing 

## mitigating and 

## aggravatingfactors, and 

## making adjustments in the 

## severity of the sentence consistent 

### withthis 

### calculus. Vela V. 

### Estelle, 708 F.2d at 954 In 

### this case, 

## appellant’s trial 

### counsel 

## presented no 

## mitigating factors for the

## judge to 

### balance 

## against the 

## aggravating factors

## presented by the State. 

## Appellant’s trial counsel offered no evidence of

## mitigating factors, 

## despite the 

## availability

of such 

## mitigation evidence filedwiththe clerk. We

can read from 

### the record that in 

### attendance at the

## punishment hearing was 

## appellants mother, and 

## appellants counsel never called any witness or asked any 

## question of

## appellant thatwould rebut the states 

### argument of

## jail time. 

### Any evidence 

### would have 

## provided some 

## counterweight to evidence of bad 

### character, which was in fact 

### received 

## by the

## judge during the 

## punishment 

## hearing. The

## judge had no 

### characterevidence to 

### consider thatmay have humanizedthe defendant and offset the State’s 

### recommendationof four years in 

## prison. The court 

### should find 

### thatcounsel’s lack

### of

## mitigation would have in 

### fact

## favorably influencedthe

## judge in assessmentof

## punishment. Counsel’s

### lackof focus at the

## punishment phase deprived appellant ofthe 

## possibilityof



## bringing out even a 

## single mitigating factor. 

## Mitigating evidence would 

### have been 

### admissible. The

## judge could have 

### considered it and 

## might have 

### been influenced

## by it. It is also a well 

### settled that an 

### attorney has a 

## professional duty to 

### present all availableevidence 

### and 

### arguments to 

### support the defense 

### of his 

### client. Thomas v. 

### State, 550 

### S.W.2d 

### 64, 68 

## (Tex.Cr.App.1977)Ineffective assistance of counsel has been found when 

### defense counsel summarizesthe 

### evidence in a manner

### favorable to the 

### State. 

## Craig V. 

### State, 847 

### S.W.2d 434 

## (Tex.

## App.——El Paso 

### 1993, no 

## pet.) A 

### defense 

## lawyer's 

## obligations in connection with

## sentencing, is to do what is 

## legally and 

## ethically

## permissible
to achievefor the 

### client the most lenient sentence 

## possible. The 

## advantage of 

## making an 

### argument for deferred 

## probation in 

## making a 

## plea for 

## leniency for

a defendant with no 

## prior felony convictions should not be 

### difficult to 

## recognize as a 

### valid 

## plea to 

### the court 

### where the State 

### has asked the court 

### for four years incarceration 

### and thatfour years 

### incarceration has 

## already been 

## rejected while

## serving months in 

## custody. The record here 

### reflects that 

### defense counsels 

### suggests the 

## opposite of 

## leniencytowards his client. In 

### the is case where 

### the 

## punishment range 

### is a betweentwo and ten years

10

### incarceration, a 

### defense counsels 

## objective should be to secure a 

### deferred



## probation at 

## sentencingtaking into 

### consideration the time 

## already spent incarcerated 

## by his client. In this case 

### the client was 

### deferred and 

## straight probation eligible with more 

### than 90 

## days served in Harris 

## County Jail 

### yet 

## appellant’s counsel filrthersthe States 

### interests, 

## arguing to 

### the 

### court, inter alia: I’m 

## going to 

### suggest to the 

### Court that some time in

## jail is necessary 

### for Mr. Norris in 

### order to

— for the Court to 

## impress on him the fact thatwhen this Court tells you 

## something,it means it. And I’m not 

## talking about a 

### short term 

### of 

### county

## jail. R.R. 48 If 

### defense counsel is not 

## talking about a short term 

### of 

### county

## jail,

reason 

## brings the 

### inference of a 

## long term in

## jail. The court in 

### Strickland stated the defendant must 

### also show thatthere 

### is a reasonable

## probability that, but 

### for counsels 

## unprofessional errors, the 

### result of the

## proceeding would have been different. The 

## possibilityof a different result 

### could have 

### been bolstered 

## by counsel 

## focusing on 

## probation eligibilityand 

## advocating for deferred 

## probation ratherthan

## jail time. 

## Directly after defense counsels 

## plea to 

### the court 

### for

## jail time, the court addresses 

### the 

### Defendant, inter 

### alia:



### Now, you know that

## you’re 

## facing me in this court with two 

## felony offenses. And 

## regardless ofwho starts 

### it, you know 

## you’re not 

## supposed to have contactwiththis person. 

### And I wouldn’t have 

### found out 

### about 

### it, but for this 

## hearing right now. Does that mean I can trust you to be on 

## probation, to follow my orders to make sure not 

### another

11person

— 

### while

## you’re on my 

## probation with my name that

### allows you

walkfree

— will be 

### hurt, 

## injured, scared, afraid or whatever? 

### And the answer to 

### the 

## question is can I trust you to be on 

## probation, to 

### follow my 

### orders. Just 

### based on this

## history alone 

### and 

## you’re not 

## following my 

### order, 

### mine, to not 

### have any contact

### withthat person, 

### the answer is no. 

### So, I’m 

## going to 

### find you 

## guiltyof both 

### ofthese 

### offenses. And I’m 

## going to assess your 

## punishment in 

### each oftheses cases at four years in the Texas

## Department of 

### criminal Justice Institutional Division. R.R 50-51
The 

### circumstances ofthe

## plea and the

## goal of 

### defense counsel should be to achievethe best

## possible outcome 

## considering the circumstances 

## given. This record 

## glaringlyreflects 

### thattrial counsel failed to advance any 

### form of 

## mitigation during this

## punishment hearing, or in any otherway 

### make use of 

## mitigation evidence availableto him or call any witness 

### availableto him. As is so often the case in those situations where any 

### defense, or for that matter any viable 

### defense, has not been 

### raised, the circumstances may reflectthat the 

### attorney may not have been familiarwiththe case or, if he 

### is, has not 

## adequately investigated the 

### facts ofthe matter. 

### Here, there 

### is also a lack

### of 

## advocacy and 

## advancing the defendant’s best interests. 

### Viewed as a whole and 

### cumulative of 

## mitigation evidence 

## presented originally,raised a 

### reasonable

## probability

thatthe 

### result of the 

## sentencing proceeding would have been different if 

### competent counsel had 

## presented and 

## explained the

12

## significance of all the available evidence and made the proper 

### argument to

the court 

## advocating for a 

## probated sentence. 

### Trial counsel never 

## inquired into the 

### defendant’s 

## probation eligibility or 

### desire to be 

## placed on 

### deferred 

## probation. The 

### record is void of any 

## testimony elicited for the defendant or any 

### availablewitness 

### present in the courtroom 

## through counsel any 

## mitigating factors 

### that may have 

## weighted against the 

## overwhelming amount 

### of

## aggravating factors introduced to the 

### Court 

## through the victims

## testimony. The record is clearthatdefense 

### counsel asks the court for a 

## prison sentence,

as does the State.

13PRAYERFOR RELIEF



### WHEREFORE, PREMISES 

### CONSIDERED, 

## Appellant prays 

### thatthis Honorable Court rule in favor 

### of

## Appellant and reverse 

### and remand this case to the 

### trial court to 

### determine which case 

### should be 

### vacated as a result 

### of ineffective assistance of 

### counsel. 

## Appellant prays that

### his Court reverse the 

### convictions and render a

## judgment of

## acquittal and remand this case 

### for a

new 

## punishment hearing and approve the

## appeal. Appellant prays for 

## general relief, and any 

### reliefthatmay 

### be 

## granted by law or 

### in 

## equity. Respectfully Submitted, 

## /
yngman 

### Stevens Jr 

## Attorneyfor 

## Appellant

14

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE



### I, 

## Syngman Stevens, 

### Jr, do 

## hereby certify that a true 

### and correct copy 

### ofthe

## foregoing Appellant’s Briefwas 

### delivered to 

## opposing counsel at 

### the time 

### of the

## filing on the 

## 8”’ day of 

## September2015, 

## by e—file 

### transmission 

### pursuant to local 

## practice. Further, I 

## certify that a copy ofthe

## foregoing Appellant’s Briefwas, this

## day mailedto 

## Appellant. RespectfilllySubmitted,

S :-N.

. yngman 

### Stevens Jr 

## Attorney for 

## Appellant

15

### CERTIFICATE OF 

### COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 

### 9.4, I 

## hereby 

## certify thatthis

## Appellate Brief

### contains less than

### 4,500 words. This is a 

## computer-generated document created in 

### Microsoft

### Word, 

## using 14-point

## typeface for all 

### text, 

### except for 

### footnotes, which are in 

## 12-point

## typeface. In 

## making this certificate 

### of

## compliance, I am 

## relying on the word count 

## provided by the 

### software used to prepare 

### the document. 

## Respectfully Submitted, ”“f,;§I.'/ S man Stevens Jr 

## Attorneyfor 

## Appellant